Talk:Academy Award for Best Animated Short Film

Layout
Instead of bullets and dashes to layout the winners/runner-ups, I think a table would be a better idea. Please start filling in the data, and then the table can be copied into the article.

Deleted 1989 info?
Someone deleted some of the 1989 info and I don't want to delete all those intermediate edits, but the info is important. Please fix!

Question About A 2006 Movie
Okay, one of the movie is this thing about an airship. Animated. But I don't know what its called.
 * The Mysterious Geographic Explorations of Jasper Morello. --Metropolitan90 19:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The Cat Concerto (1946 winner)
Discussion on Talk:The Cat Concerto - can someone explain the apparent discrepancy between its release date and this award? --KJBracey 17:59, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

The oscars are given to the films of the prior year, so the 1946 oscars were given to films from 1945. Is that what you mean?

Sinbad the Sailor (1936 nominee)
I changed this:


 * **Sinbad the Sailor - Celebrity Productions Inc. - Ub Iwerks producer, director and animator

...to this:


 * **Popeye the Sailor Meets Sindbad the Sailor - Fleischer Studios - Max Fleischer, producer - Dave Fleischer, director - Willard Bowsky, George Germanetti, and Ed Nolan, animators

..after checking the IMDb and consulting with animation producer/historian Ray Pointer here:. The "Sinbad the Sailor" film nominated for the 1936 Best Animated Short Film Academy Award is the Fleischer - produced Popeye two-reeler, not the Ub Iwerks film. --b. Touch 02:50, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

What a mess!
I don't know why it was decided to make this into a table, but it's virtually uneditable, especially if you want to do it in a different format like the 2005 list where there isn't a winner yet. And my edits put the 2005 list at the top of the 2000s instead of under the table. I have no idea how to fix it. User:Zoe|(talk) 23:23, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm guessing that the reason for using tables is to maintain columns, which lists don't handle very well. That said, there is no reason why there couldn't be a separate table for each year. It would simplify the code needed to maintain the information without losing the basic visual formatting currently in use. It would also simplify the addition of subsequent years, as one could just copy the prior years table, and replace the old data with the new information for that year.


 * If there is consensus for it, I could make the changes later this week. --Coro 23:50, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


 * The table format, in addition to being a lot more difficult to edit and maintain, is inconsistent with the majority of the other Academy Award lists. Also, since most of the list is not yet in table format, it looks like it would be less work to remove the tables than to convert the entire article to table format. I vote to remove the table formatting. dryguy 23:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the table looks better than the list, actually. It's certainly easier for a reader to browse.  It's not so very hard to edit... Just copy & paste the relevant information - understanding how the table works is not necessary. Esn 03:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I would recommend using the list format rather than the table format, since the table takes up more space without adding any more useful information. Identifying each ceremony as the 76th or 77th Academy Awards or whatever number it is is not necessary since the Oscars are year-based. Also, in the list, we should put the winners for each year in boldface, not just list them first. --Metropolitan90 19:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, I would note that the information applicable to each cartoon varies from year to year. Sometimes the nomination went to a producer, sometimes a director; sometimes the cartoon was part of a series, sometimes not; some cartoons had distributors, some didn't; sometimes we have animator information, sometimes we don't. I'd rather use a list in this case since it means we are free in terms of just including the information we have rather than leaving gaps or trying to shoehorn all the shorts into the same format for the table. --Metropolitan90 20:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Number of nominees
Why are there 3 nominees in some years, and 5 (or more) in others? Esn 08:14, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The Academy has changed its rules numerous times over the years. Under current rules, the nominating committee rates the top selections on a scale where 10 points is best, and the selections with at least an average of 7.5 receive nominations -- but there must be at least 3 and no more than 5 nominations, so the practical minimum score can vary from year to year.

In general, it looks like during the World War II years each major studio was entitled to submit one nominee (this was actually the official policy in some of the other categories).

In the 1960s, the major studios started phasing out of the animated short business. Disney cut down to 2 animated shorts a year or fewer in 1962; MGM and Paramount stopped making animated shorts in 1967; Terrytoons (distributed by Fox) ended production of theatrical shorts in 1968; Warner Bros. stopped in 1969; and Walter Lantz (distributed by Universal) stopped in 1972. This would help explain why the number of nominees dropped from 5 to 3 per year in the 1960s; animated shorts were a less important part of the film industry, and fewer were being produced and released. --Metropolitan90 08:43, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, that also explains why they suddenly started giving nominations and awards to foreign films, whereas before they had completely ignored them. Thanks. Maybe this should be in the article somewhere? Esn 09:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed info in the introduction
I removed this part: I see plenty of especially Eastern European shorts among the nominees and even winners also in other years and I'm not sure what the person adding this tried to say. It's so blatantly wrong that I begin to doubt my understating of English, so I thought I'd put this here just in case. --Messlo (talk) 01:07, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * and only in 1960 and 2008 were films nominated that were not made in North America.

How short
How short must a film be to be eligible for this award? If anyone knows, please include it in the article. PetiteFadette (talk) 10:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * 40 mins or less. Done. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 18:36, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
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)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Academy Award for Best Animated Short Film. 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/20080409164709/http://www.oscars.org:80/80academyawards/rules/rule19.html to http://www.oscars.org/80academyawards/rules/rule19.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:31, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Academy Award for Best Animated Short Film. 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/20071017110215/http://www.oscars.org/awards/academyawards/rules/rule19.html to http://www.oscars.org/awards/academyawards/rules/rule19.html
 * 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

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)

91st Oscars nominees
 Espngeek (talk) 18:01, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Animal Behavior
 * Bao
 * Late Afternoon
 * One Small Step
 * Weekends

Longest nominated film

 * Fresh Guacamole is the shortest to be nominated, but what about the longest? Espngeek (talk) 18:02, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * If IMDb is to be trusted, it's Pear Cider and Cigarettes, at 35 minutes. 190.193.171.247 (talk) 22:47, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

SEO abuse?
The Google search "Ticket without a seat wikipedia" (no quotes)  puts this page at the very top of the results, but that title doesn't seem to appear on this page. That takes some doing. It looks like there's a massive Internet hoax about this animated short winning an Oscar, but there's no authoritative proof or disproof anywhere I can find. If this is indeed a hoax, is there a term of service (or any rule) that might call for doing something to remove Wikipedia's participation? Danchall (talk) 16:03, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Lede and article contradict each other
The lede states that "the National Film Board of Canada (NFB) won with The Romance of Transportation in Canada in 1952" but the table in the article states otherwise for 1952. Which is it? I believe that the winner was the NFB... Does anyone disagree? Are there credible references that can be cited? Ross Fraser (talk) 01:25, 2 September 2022 (UTC)


 * The Academy Database has the full list; Romance of Transportation lost to Johann Mouse, so the lead section is incorrect. 2800:2161:5000:67C:5436:33EF:4782:7689 (talk) 02:33, 17 May 2023 (UTC)