This article is within the scope of WikiProject Awards and prizes, 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature 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.
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.
With the conversion of all years to standalone articles listing all winners and nominees, the old merged winners-only List of Lambda Literary Award winners is no longer necessary and has accordingly been converted into a redirect to this article. The following subsection is the talk page discussion that was previously posted there. Bearcat (talk) 04:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
The 2008 Awards were concluded and given out in May 2009. This is a common misunderstanding about their time frame. Ergo, there are no missing 2009 awards. I will add a note to the listing to explain this if one isn't there. No point people searching for information not yet available. --FairySoap (talk) 00:25, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that the dates for the awards were wrong, so corrected them. Then I saw that the categories didn't match what Lambda itself has on its web-page. So fixed those. Alphebetized them, as per Lambda. Added a little to the introduction. And for good measure, added the awards for 2002. MacMurrough 19:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
In general, there probably should be a separate article for each category that the Lambdas present, just as there's already a separate article for each year — however, it should list the winners and nominees, not only the winners. And furthermore, I see that the AFC proposal failed a very important formatting matter, i.e. actually wikilinking the names of the listed writers. So while an article could rightly exist, it certainly does need to be better than that article as written.
As with most other articles about awards programs which present multiple awards in multiple categories, for size management reasons spinning out sublists by year and/or category is the only way we can realistically provide all of the relevant information without making the main article far too long to be useful — so if the Lambdas themselves are notable (which they are), then there's no value in requiring separate demonstration of the individual notability of each individual category that the award offers or each individual year that it was presented in. It would be like insisting that the Academy Award for Best Sound isn't notable enough to stand alone as an independent article, but should just be merged directly into Academy Awards instead — even though that article only cites a single primary source in its current form and really doesn't get covered all that much as a separate topic in its own right, the value of our Academy Awards coverage would not be advanced by only allowing some categories to stand alone as independent topics while others had to go into the main article even if that hindered its quality. Rather each category has a standalone article regardless of how anybody feels about the notability or non-notability of that individual category, because having by-year and by-category spinoffs is the best and most coherent and most useful way for us to present the information about the Academy Awards as a whole.
That said, for the reasons I listed in my first paragraph I'd recommend that you pass on that article. I'll take a stab as soon as I can at creating an article in the format that should be followed for this type of thing. Bearcat (talk) 00:35, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Update: I've now created Lambda Literary Award for Gay Fiction, which lists the winners and nominees for all 25 years to date. As you can see it's a lot more substantial that way than the version that was submitted to AFD. So whatever the appropriate process is from here for the original AFC submission, feel free to bump it along the chain. Bearcat (talk) 03:14, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your thoughtful solution to this. I've added a comment to the submission. It is currently in a declined state and out of the AfC queue. If the author, Bradwall73, or anyone else resubmits it, it should be rejected as a duplicate of the article you created. ~KvnG 04:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)