Talk:Foot in Mouth Award

Foot in Mouth Award 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.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured list on April 1, 2013.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 12, 2007	Articles for deletion	No consensus
October 9, 2012	Featured list candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured list

Awards 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Linguistics Low‑importance

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics 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.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics
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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

!?!?

"Although the Foot in Mouth award was not introduced until 1993, the Vice President of the United States, Dan Quayle received a special mention during the 1991 awards for his tent metaphor: "

WHAT 1991 awards? I thought there weren't any? If you mean mention was made during the 1993 awards, say that. The information from this article doesn't specify it, but that's the closest guess I can make.

This part of the article is pretty baffling, and not very plain or clear.

Now I've pointed out the problem, someone do the research. The Campaign for English or whatever must surely have the manpower.

92.40.254.144 (talk) 18:52, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As the article states, "The Plain English Campaign was set up in 1979... The group made their first awards the next year..." So there were awards since 1980, but the Foot in Mouth Award itself was only introduced as part of those awards in 1993. Harrias ^talk 19:09, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article is very

This article is very interesting. Speling12345 (talk) 7:46, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Foot in Mouth Award. 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/20121022175452/http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/Graduation/114808.htm to http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/Graduation/114808.htm

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) 08:49, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rationales and unclear attribution

The rationales in the winner section must be harmonized. At the moment, some, like that of the 2016 award, seem to be copied verbatim from the reference cited. Others are written in Wikipedia's voice, but contain unencyclopedic statements such as most of the 2018 rationale and the words "baffling jargon" for 1994. This, together with the lack of italics or any other indication of whose voice is conveyed, renders the origin of the words unclear and is wholly inappropriate for a featured list. This situation must be rectified as soon as possible if we wish to retain FL status here. Kranix (talk | contribs) 19:48, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On the 2017 award

Rees-Mogg's award description should be rewritten, I don't mean to take his or anyone's side but it's pretty explicitly biased against him

I tried to add the Unbalanced template to his part but wasn't able since it wasn't an entire section/page (I'm sure there's some way of going about doing it that I am too new to understand) Hors.d'oeuvre (talk) 18:33, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]