Talk:Clio Awards/Archives/2012

Apple 1984 Clio entry Section
I don't understand the relevance of this section to the overall page. Why is this incident important enough to be included? I recommend either removing it or including it in a section of historically significant events. Yllwsmrf (talk) 06:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Revisions
At 20:24 on 2 May 2005 63.251.31.8 removed all references to a historically significant even in Clio Award history. I have replaced the earlier references to the 1991 event and will monitor this page for future historical revisionism. I have kept all of that editor's additional information, even though it is a bit non-NPOV. Jokestress 04:21, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

More revisions
63.251.31.8 has continued to remove the same information several times since the earlier entry. I have requested that this user join in the discussion on this talk page to explain reasons why this event should be removed. Jokestress 04:37, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Revisions reversed
The original article is not "a bit non-NPOV". It is a direct quote from a copyrighted internet article, and is filled with envy, hate, and has nothing to do with correct historical facts. There was no "riot" on stage at the end of the show. The guests left, they did not "storm the stage" trying to get their statues. The article contradicts itself, and should not be allowed to remain unedited.


 * I meant the Wikipedia article was a bit non-NPOV. I removed a lot of the puffery and limited the 1991 incident to a phrase in one sentence. The 1991 thing was a big deal-- made the front page of Adweek and Advertising Age and was the talk of the industry for weeks. It needs to be referenced in the article. The guy who wrote the first-hand account did not have "hate" and "envy" as you claim-- he won three Clios that year. Mention of "riot" and "storm the stage" do not appear in the Wikipedia article, but in the first-hand account. The cited article is a lot nicer about the whole thing that the trades were at the time. They ran photos of ad people in tuxes dashing off with statuettes in their hands and wrote a lot of hand-wringing editorials. The first-hand account seems to see the humor in the whole thing. Jokestress 06:47, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Sure, but you can just call the event "scandal-plagued" and make no further comment. Enquiring minds want to know. Thankfully the history gave me a glimpse of what happened. Nohat 07:40, 12 August 2005 (UTC)


 * My 11 November version had a lengthy description but was reverted by another editor as "hate" etc. I agree that the incident needs explaining, but the editor above kept reverting, blanking my user page, etc., so I was trying to compromise. Jokestress 07:56, 12 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, here's to hoping that the revisionist anon doesn't deem it necessary to revert my summary. Nohat 09:03, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Moved broken link

 * Creative Liberation Intelligence Organization (C.L.I.O)] Clandestine organization behind the Clio Awards


 * Just removed this link a second time. The link goes to a non-existent site. Once the site exists, the link is fine. Jokestress 03:21, 9 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Just removed it again. It links to a deceptive site that is being used for spamming.

Restored External link
It's a website that makes a parody of the Clio Awards and is connected to and paid for by Clio Awards themselves. No sure how the spammers come into the picture, but the site as it is now is legitimate.

Picture of Clio Awards Missing
I'd like to see picture of the Cio Awards here. Here is a perfect one, but I don't know how to comply with the wiki rules to post it here, and I hope someone else will do this:

http://www.clioawards.com/images/store/stor_statues.jpg

Thanks. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 02:13, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Grand Clio
Is it true that the Grand Clio has been awarded only once for a BNZ ad from the Colenso agency in NZ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.152.86.48 (talk • contribs)
 * Many Grand Clios have been given out. Jokestress 05:25, 28 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Did this ad win a Best Of Show or something like that? I heard the judges voted unanimously on this one ad and that's never happened before or since. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.152.86.48 (talk • contribs)
 * I'd need more information (client, year, ad title, medium, agency). Colenso BBDO has won awards (there are many, many award shows), but they don't list a Grand Clio on their site. If you have a citation, I'll take a look, but I can't really answer your question based on something you heard somewhere. Jokestress 00:27, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The year would have been around 1993, the company the Bank of New Zealand, the writer Len Potts and the agency Colenso, as this was before 'Colenso BBDO' to my knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.110.145.13 (talk • contribs)


 * In 1993, Colenso Communication won for an individual commercial called "Retirement Talk" and for a national campaign of commercials for Bank of New Zealand, as well as getting the best of show award. Best of Show is awarded annually. Jokestress 04:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks a bunch!

Fair use rationale for Image:Clio Statue.jpg
Image:Clio Statue.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)