Talk:52nd Annual Grammy Awards

Awards: Grammy Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Awards, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of awards and prizes on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AwardsWikipedia:WikiProject AwardsTemplate:WikiProject Awardsawards articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by Grammy Awards task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Music Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Music portal This article is supported by WikiProject American music (assessed as Mid-importance).

Rap

This genre's winners/nominees is missing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.34.134 (talk) 02:39, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Winners

As winners are announced in the hours ahead the nominees list should be adjusted into a winners list. Pages for previous grammys show just the winners. The recordings that don't win should be removed so each category shows only the winner of the award. Producers, engineers, mixers and mastering engineers as well as songwriters whose names are already included (for various awards) should not be removed from each category if they win for their respective category. --Alextwa (talk) 17:58, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is really a very bad idea. Begin nominated is a notable honor, and it should be a part of this page. That pages for previous grammy shows were edited in this manner is not sufficient cause to continue making the same mistake. -ErinHowarth (talk) 05:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All Pages on Pevious grammy ceremonies on years page look the same way. It is winners only. I changed this page to look like all pages on previous ceremonies. Things should be consistent. --Alextwa (talk) 15:17, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Things should not be consistently bad or consistently wrong. This was a mistake last year. It was a mistake the year before that, and it is a mistake this year. It makes the page far less useful and far less interesting. -ErinHowarth (talk) 19:03, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Performers/Presenters

Everyone who will be performing/presenting will be confirmed on the grammy website. It is the most reliable source since its the academy itself. Any rumors circulating in the press should not be included here. --Alextwa (talk) 19:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We are less than 24 hour away so at this point no more performers/presenters will be announced. Anything entered at this point may be considered vandalism. --Alextwa (talk) 05:58, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Zac Brown Band perfomed another song in addition to America the Beautiful, but I can't edit the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.210.35.148 (talk) 02:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Dave Matthews performed before Drake at least. Dave Matthews are performing right now. Skoen (talk) 03:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure the Jeff Beck & Imelda May song was called "How High the Moon". Not a registered user, though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.78.100.252 (talk) 04:10, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Official Logo?

Can we insert a picture of the official logo for the 52nd Annual Grammy Awards into the infobox? The previous pages on grammy ceremonies have them. --Alextwa (talk) 15:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations

When were the nominations announced? -ErinHowarth (talk) 00:24, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Request

Many anonymous users come onto this page and enter information that has not been confirmed. It continues to happen often. These users are not registered. They only have their ip address available. As a result I think this page should only be reserved to users who are members. --Alextwa (talk) 05:00, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: {{edit semi-protected}} is not required for edits to semi-protected, unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. This is really a request for page protection. Brian Jason Drake 05:37, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Alextwa. Brian Jason Drake 10:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Britney?

Britney will not perform.... please someone delete this. --Jlrm1 (talk) 00:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted all those edits. It is getting out of hand and I have requested to have this page protected. --Alextwa (talk) 05:45, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Broadcast

Does anyone know if it will be internationally broadcasted, in countries like the UK? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.171.144 (talk) 00:48, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nominees

Why are the nominees that didn't win being removed?? That's pretty dumb to remove perfectly legitimate information; it is still very notable and relevant to the topic when a person/group earns a nomination, even if they don't win. All other major awards articles list the other nominees with the winner, and the Grammys should do the same. Reywas92^Talk 01:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and hopefully within the next few days (when the rush to designate winners dies down) someone will have the time to restore all of that info. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 01:37, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well tonight is when this page receives the most page views it ever will. It is not hard to just bold the winners, place them on top, or whatever else, but removing the nominees that didn't win is not only a disservice to the still-honored singers, etc., but our readers who may be interested in who the winners had for competition. It appears that most of the Grammy articles fail to mention the nominees, but this must be changed, starting with this article now. Reywas92^Talk 01:45, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse my bad english, but if you check other grammy award list (see 51st Grammy Awards or 50th Grammy Awards) you will find only winners, and if I don't revove the "losers" another wikipedian would do it Tbhotch (talk) 01:44, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it's being done wrong here. No other major awards list (Oscars, Golden Globes, etc.) deletes nominees. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 01:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They should be changed too. Sure, thet lost, but they were still nominated and it's rude to remove them. This is notable and relevant information. If you look below, someone has already complained that the nominees are being removed. If others are doing it, then change it back. Is simply bolding the winner acceptable? It can be changed later, but the nominees must be kept. Reywas92^Talk 01:53, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with all of you, seriously, I'd like to keep winners in bold but if you check before the live Grammy Awards begin someone delete nominees in almost all categories and WIKIPEDIA Academy Award lists are not the same WIKIPEDIA Grammy Award lists. I put 2 internal links 51st Grammy Awards or 50th Grammy Awards or either it's the same thing Tbhotch (talk) 01:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I saw User:Reywas92 restore nominees, and it's ok, but restore ALL nominees Tbhotch (talk) 02:07, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's being done in segments (understandably.) Give it time. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 02:09, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've got all of this year's nominees back up. Please don't remove any others, and restore them if someone else does. We can worry about the other years later. Thanks, Reywas92^Talk 02:21, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work. Thanks.--| Uncle Milty | talk | 02:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Was there ever a previous discussion to eventually remove the nominees in the Grammy articles?[1] I find it odd that this seems to be the only articles out of the other major award articles that this is practiced. Zzyzx11 (talk) 03:09, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, awards not for the performers (i.e. Song of the Year) should have the songwriter(s) or relevant recipient(s) listed. CrazyC83 (talk) 03:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All valid points but my view is that with over 100 awards (most of which not everyone is interested in unless you are an industry professional) that a winners list is easier to navigate. After a while the public is uninterested in who was nominated one year. Santana won album of the year in 2000. I think most people don't care that the backstreet boys were nominated with all due respect to them. Also there are wiki pages on award categories (ie Album of the Year). Those pages (most of them) contain the other nominees for each year. If anything those pages should be that way while the pages for each ceremony should have just the winners. I think we can reach a good concensus on this. --Musicmakingking (talk) 15:09, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I aggree with you 100%. It is just a lot more logical. I really believe this page should show just the winners. As you said. Its easier to navigate. Each award has its own page. THAT is the place for the other nominees who did not win. --Alextwa (talk) 14:40, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete nominees give to the article misinformation, as simple as this. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 22:50, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Elton John/Lady Gaga

Your song was performed as well.--Cooly123 01:37, 1 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs)

deleting nominees

why someone's deleting the nominees? i'm visiting this site not only to see winners but also the rest. that's crazy and it means i have to visit other sites to see the complex list... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.186.147.190 (talk) 01:47, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

click here Tbhotch (talk) 01:52, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i don't care about the last year's grammys. the oscars page has all the information, and i expect the same here. i just can't understand why it's deleted —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.186.147.190 (talk) 01:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It' a notable honor to be nominated. If nominations were deleted last year, that was a mistake that need not be repeated this year. -ErinHowarth (talk) 04:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia should have consistancy on grammy pages. This is how all the other pages on ceremonies past look. There is not need for just the nominees. There are many many awards. --Alextwa (talk) 15:19, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

why? because you say this? wikipedia is made FOR PEOPLE, and people want to see the nominees. i couldn't watch the grammys live so when i entered this page i was sure there'd be the complex list. and what i see? a piece of s#!@. thanks a lot for this consistancy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.186.129.155 (talk) 15:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just as in all other award ceremony articles, the nominees should be included. Information on nominees is encyclopedic, and should be included. When time permits I will endeavor to restore nominees to this article and to previous Grammy ceremony articles. Unless someone else beats me to it. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 17:46, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alextwa, I am also a strong believer in consistency, but to remove perfectly notable and requested information is beyond me. As Uncle Milty has concurred, we must make the rest of the articles consistent to this one now. Reywas92^Talk 01:06, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alextwa just reverted back to an old version without the nominees, and lacking several other things that had been fixed in the meantime, such as removing the trivia section. I undid those changes, as removing the nominees is against the consensus here. For the record, I am in favor of including the nominees -- Foetusized (talk) 18:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was just looking through this and I think the page should have just the winners listed. Yes it does make sense. I've been looking on this page several times and it is much easier to make out if its just the winners. Look at the pages for Grammys in years past. Its just the winners and frankly its easier to use. Yes, The pages for the oscars contain the nominees as well but thats a completely different awards show. It is much easier to get a grammy nomination. There are many awards, unlike the Oscars. This page should be winners only. Alextwa is right. The page he put together is much better than what is currently here. --Musicmakingking (talk) 14:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not much better. The version with the nominees removed, that you keep switching to, has several other problems. For example, it has a Trivia section; see Wikipedia:Trivia sections for why this is an issue. If you want a discussion of this article, lets discuss it. While you are engaging in an edit war, I doubt anyone will take your position seriously -- Foetusized (talk) 17:54, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

rap/hip hop nominees

rap/hip hop nominees disappeared:P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.186.147.190 (talk) 02:17, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't there a list of nominees/winners for rap? that's ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.128.52.130 (talk) 02:52, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

don't worry, someone delete it, but it's now Tbhotch (talk) 03:11, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Best Country Album

Why can't I find the nominees and winner for best country album? Isn't it a category? -ErinHowarth (talk) 04:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

someone deleted it, but it's done now Tbhotch (talk) 04:48, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

lapel pins

All the presenters were wearing matching lapel pins. They are similar to the American Red Cross logo, but they did not feature the full white field behind the red cross. I assume that they have something to do with Haitian disaster relief. Does anyone know any more? Would it be appropriately notable to add to the article? -ErinHowarth (talk) 06:08, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

presented during the broadcast

It seems to me that it might be notable to indicate which awards were presented during the show. They don't present ALL of these during the broadcast, do they? I also noted that sometimes a presenter would indicate that someone who was about to perform had already won two awards that night, when I was sure they hadn't announced any awards for that artist, so I wonder if only bits of the show are broadcast. -ErinHowarth (talk) 06:14, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since this article is really about the ceremony itself, and not just what is shown on TV, all information should be included. The "show" started long before the broadcast started. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 17:47, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I agree, that all the information should be there. I was thinking of something like a comment off to the side to indicate that this award or that award was actually presented during the broadcast. I wonder how long the "show" is compared to the broadcast. -ErinHowarth (talk) 19:03, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found the answer to my question, and I added it to the article. "Only nine of the 109 awards were received during the broadcast. The remaining awards were given during the un-televised portion of the ceremony which preceded the broadcast." -ErinHowarth (talk) 23:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rapper w/most wins

Jay-Z won 3 Grammys. In the introduction, Eminem has been said to have the most Grammys of any rapper. He has 2: Best Rap Performance by a Duo/Group for Crack A Bottle & Best Rap Album for Relapse Jay-Z has Best Rap Song: Run This Town Best Rap Solo Performance: D.O.A. (Death of Auto-Tune) Best Rap/Sung Collaboration: Run This Town And Jay-Z should also be mentioned in the intro for having 3 Grammys, BEP are —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.177.69.158 (talk) 09:25, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

who hosted the show?

I didn't watch it, but I thought that Colbert hosted the event - though the article does not mention the word "host" at all. Was there a host? If not, how does that work? 128.223.131.109 (talk) 18:41, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There was no host. Colbert just presented the first award. The show moves along with the help of a voiceover lady who says "coming up, it's XXX!" Gary King (talk) 21:12, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Announcer ?" was added to the article as the host. I reverted -- Foetusized (talk) 02:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P!nk's Performance deserves special notice

Arguably the highlight of the show the rest of the program withered and paled by comparison Rmarler (talk) 23:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to add more information about her performance if you've got a reliable source to back it up. Gary King (talk) 01:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:2012 Grammy Awards which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:00, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 52nd Annual Grammy 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100201/ap_on_en_mu/us_grammys_50

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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} 08:05, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 52nd Annual Grammy 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.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:12, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

At least some awards for wrong years

1) I've added a Citation Needed beside Lifetime Achievement, giving the following reason parameter: "According to www.grammy.com, the official Grammy website, all these 7 Lifetime Achievement awards are for 2010, and were given out in the 53rd Grammies at the start of 2011. It is clear that we also have other instances of this problem as our 53rd Grammy article lists a different set of Lifetime Achievement winners, tho it is not yet clear how widespread the problem is."
2) I've no idea how big this problem is. I came across it while trying to fix a single digit error in our Andre Previn article with a view to possibly trying to bring that up to the standard needed to appear at In The News (ITN, where it had been posted, then pulled due inadequate quality). But I'm now probably going to have to give that up, having seemingly bitten off more than I care to try to chew (per WP:NOTCOMPULSORY and WP:BNO).
3) But I'm leaving this post here in case editors more interested than I am in the Grammies and/or Previn might wish to try to fix it.
4) Regards, Tlhslobus (talk) 08:09, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]