Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Awards

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

WikiProject Awards (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

State awards of the Azerbaijani Republic listed at Requested moves[edit]

Information.svg

A requested move discussion has been initiated for State awards of the Azerbaijani Republic to be moved to Orders, decorations, and medals of Azerbaijan. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 12:02, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

List of accolades received by the Spider-Man film series listed at Requested moves[edit]

Information.svg

A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of accolades received by the Spider-Man film series to be moved. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 05:47, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Notability of Nautilus Book Awards and Independent Publisher Book Awards[edit]

Dear fellow Wikipedians, In this edit a user has proposed to add three awards to an article about the Gokhale Method. Two of these awards have their own articles on this WikiProject: Nautilus Book Awards and Independent Publisher Book Awards. However, since both articles have not been assessed yet, and little secondary sources have been provided in it, I was wondering whether the awards are notable enough to include in the article about the Gokhale Method. Comments are welcome.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 23:17, 17 October 2017 (UTC)--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 00:10, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

I've been looking into the same topic for the same reason.
There's concern (on and off Wikipedia) that the three awards may be vanity awards, or means of identifying new authors for marketing from vanity publishers, especially the one you don't mention, forewordreviews.com. Independent Publisher Book Awards is a part of http://jenkinsgroupinc.com. I've found little about Nautilus Book Awards other than they have slick and prominent marketing.
I found what appears to be a good breakdown on the quality of various awards: https://selfpublishingadvice.org/allis-self-publishing-service-directory/award-and-contest-ratings-reviews/ . I expect there are more lists like this, but didn't find any with my quick searches.
I'd hope none of the three would be considered for notability or due weight issues given their apparent biases.
The Nautilus Book Awards and Independent Publisher Book Awards articles are puff pieces. They need to be rewritten from independent sources or stubbed. --Ronz (talk) 16:42, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Not much to work with. Seems it is hard to find an award these days that actually has information from third-party sources.
Let's see if anyone in this WikiProject has any opinion on it. If no-one responds, I don't see what use it is to have a WikiProject about this any longer.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 20:59, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
It's a low-traffic / interest Project.. but worth keeping around. The best way to tell if an award is notable is if the award is followed by major reliable secondary sources. For example when the Booker Prize is announced, there are stories in the Guardian, BBC etc.. if sustained coverage exists over time it's probably notable. If not that doesn't mean lack of notability but raises questions. Nautilus Book Award doesn't have serious coverage it's local press, press releases, blogs. And it;s structured as a vanity award where recipients pay to receive an honor (marketing) - real awards pay the winner - not the other way around. -- GreenC 22:37, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, GreenC. And the Independent Publisher Book Awards?
If both are vanity awards with little deep coverage from secondary sources, shouldn't we start an AfD for their WP articles as has happened here?--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 13:20, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
You could try but they are not source-less so will require educating AfD voters on the nature of these awards. The 'vanity award' has some useful info generally defined as "high entry fees, with for-profit business models and numerous categories and promises of marketing". The IPPA award was setup by Jenkins Group, Inc as part of a package of marketing services, here is their complete list of services. Has high entry fees, lots of winners, promises of marketing, little coverage by mainstream media, for-profit business model. -- GreenC 14:18, 19 October 2017 (UTC)


I'm of the opinion it's sometimes better to keep the article as a platform to highlight the award's true nature, which does more good than keeping it in the dark through deletion.

Article split[edit]

I have started a discussion to split the article National Film Award – Special Jury Award / Special Mention (Feature Film). I hope WPAW members would spare some time to join the discussion. Regards. --Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 09:57, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 27 November 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. (non-admin closure) James (talk/contribs) 23:46, 6 December 2017 (UTC)


Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards and prizesWikipedia:WikiProject Awards – "Prizes" is already implicated, as is a hugh amount of other stuff than cannot be bothered to be included in the title. Considering simplicity seems at hand. Please compare Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards. Chicbyaccident (talk) 01:31, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Most things fall under awards and prizes with no clear majority. It's difficult to articulate but I think awards and prizes is more explanatory, though if it was renamed I could live with it. There might be a "not to be confused with" WikiProject Wikipedia Awards since they are so close. -- GreenC 03:57, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support as more concise and less redundant. Plus "prizes" is ambiguous. I can get one out of a breakfast cereal box, or on a game show.  — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  13:01, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
When one says "Awards and prizes" it's not really ambiguous in that context, and most awards and prizes are actually called an "award" or "prize". -- GreenC 14:52, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose move to article namespace. (I'm sure this was an oversight, but felt the need to state this anyways.) Steel1943 (talk) 20:03, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
@Steel1943:--Can you clarify your !vote, please? Regards:)Winged Blades Godric 07:06, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric: Check out the move request: The requested move destination is WikiProject Awards, which is in the "(Article)" namespace. Steel1943 (talk) 13:33, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
...And this edit happened after my vote. Steel1943 (talk) 13:34, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject[edit]

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Awards_and_prizes

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 13:18, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

We need YOU!

AFC-Logo.svg

Hello WikiProject Awards,

Unregistered editors cannot create articles on Wikipedia, but they can use the articles for creation process to submit drafts that registered editors can either accept and publish or decline. WikiProject Articles for creation is looking for experienced editors who want to partake in this peer review process. If you have what it takes to get involved, then please take a look at the reviewing instructions. To discuss specific AfC reviews, do so freely on the designated talk page.

There is currently a backlog of over 3700 drafts (420 very old).

If you know an editor who may be willing to help out, please use the template you are currently reading {{subst:WPAFCInvite}} to draw attention to this WikiProject. Many hands make light work!

Worldbruce (talk) 01:21, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Editors willing to review a variety of drafts are especially welcome. If you're interested only in reviewing certain topics, that still helps. At least 12 pending drafts relate to awards (are in the intersection of Category:Pending AfC submissions and Category:Draft-Class awards articles). Over 2000 pending drafts have not yet had a WikiProject added, so more may be in the scope of this WikiProject. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:21, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Awards and prizes[edit]

Should Template:WikiProject Awards and prizes be moved to Template:WikiProject Awards, and should the message be included to remove "prizes" from the title of the project? ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:26, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Probably so. It's a protected template, so I'll leave a message on its talk page. --GentlemanGhost (converse) 20:33, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Physical awards[edit]

This is still a half baked idea so I am throwing this into this arena to see if there is enough heat to finnish off the baking. WP has been going long enough now, that we have had a number of very valued editors pass away. For current editors we can award a WP t-shirt. How can we acknowledge the sterling work of those who are no longer with us ? My thinking is that in this age of computerized aided deign and manufacture we could inexpensively generate plaques in a similar vein to Blue plaques. Blue plaques normally are affixed to the wall of the nominees home – in the sprit of WP however, I think they ought to be (on first option) be displayed on their collage walls. WP has long shaken off the mantel of amateurism and these plaques may encourage newbie academics to view WP as something worth spending time on (so this is a plus plus). Sure, there are many passed editors that came from a non-academic background – but they went to school too didn't they. Let the plaques go up there. English heritage who authorize and erect Blue Plaques in the UK require at least 20 years must have passed since a candidate’s death. Think 2 years for our purposes would suffice as it gives enough time for reflection. I.E., these awards should be reserved for the truly worthy who have made significant contributions. Aspro (talk) 17:39, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Fine idea. There are some issues with privacy as where do you send the physical award as it would require someone to reveal their real name and address which maybe the nominee never did while alive and shouldn't that be respected, and how do you find out since contact emails may cease to be read by relatives. There is nothing stopping a virtual award, which could have a voluntary "board" with nominees and limited number of recipients each year to avoid dilution. This sets it above the typical awards so many display, makes it more prestigious by stint of rarity and chosen by the community. -- GreenC 19:40, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Good points and you have packed so much in to so few words that I'm going to have trouble answering them – but here goes: The nominee may have wished and adhered to anonymity in life and in life we should not out them. Anon can be for life but after death, privacy no longer has a reason. There are some exceptions, where people have requested that their diaries/memoirs are not published until ten year after their death etc. That however, is for reasons that don't apply here. For example Chris Sherwin never revealed his real identity in life whilst editing WP as DrChrissy. The physical awards would be offered to their former school, collage or hall of residence etc. Some might say ah but there are only some 125,000 English WP editors but I reply: What institution is going to refuse to install a physical award for a past alumnus or alumna when all the staff and administrators frequently read Wikipedia? Vanity alone, will want them to acknowledge such a former pupil. So there is no problem with finding such plaques a home. Certainly, the community should decide to avoid dilution. I'm envisaging plaques for editors that our community agree have been exceptional contributers to WP – which I guess counts me out of ever getting one. Yet, there are a few that have stood head and shoulders above the rest of us. I am looking at giving them public recognition in a physical form. Aspro (talk) 00:09, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Question about lists of recipients[edit]

If I make an award article, is it a good idea to include a list of recipients for each category? And if it's yes, should the article be included in the list project and have a list category added?★Trekker (talk) 18:58, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Are BreakTudo Awards notable?[edit]

Even if they are, the articles need cleanup. From what I can tell from auto-translations of the sources, the "awards" are heavily promoted, but the only notability I can see is simply that they they are heavily promoted. I am not seeing significant editing from anything but WP:SPA accounts (apologies if I overlooked someone). --Ronz (talk) 16:49, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Fake nominees in list of award ceremonies[edit]

While translating 44th Annie Awards in French, I've noticed discrepancies between the entries listed in the article and the list of nominees in additional sources. After a quick check of the official source, I've established these entries (about SpongeBob SquarePants and Sesame Street) are fake and immediately removed them.

I'm concerned, though. Who did this? Are there more fakes like this? Is it part of a wider marketing campaign or "test" of Wikipedia? I'm not used to Wikipedia in English and need to opinion about it. J. N. Squire (talk) 20:34, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Fix it and move on. This is an old edit and doesn't seem to be part of a pattern, it's not worth being concerned about. If you see a consistent pattern of factually inaccurate edits then it's worth looking at, but as it is I'd just revert it and carry on with your day. -- Thanks, Alfie. talk to me | contribs 20:40, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Template name?[edit]

Should the template name be {{WikiProject Awards|class=stub|importance=low}} or maybe {{WikiProject Awards and prizes|class=stub|importance=low}}/nowiki> or maybe <nowiki>{{WikiProject Awards and Prizes|class=stub|importance=low}} or maybe something else? All of those template examples result in the proper categories of Stub-Class awards articles and Low-importance awards articles, but the talk page has the project name in green, showing a redirect.

I would standardize on one name which is not a redirect, but I don't know which one produces the right result.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 00:14, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Deletion discussion[edit]

There's a deletion discussion within this WikiProject's scope going on at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foresight Institute Feynman Prize in Nanotechnology. The main area of contention is whether there are sufficient independent secondary sources for the award. Feedback would be appreciated. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 10:51, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

The discussion has proceeded to an RfC about the implications of WP:SELFPUB, WP:DUE, and other policies for whether lists of awardees may be included in awards articles. Again, feedback would be appreciated. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 01:21, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Input request[edit]

Editor input is requested at this thread Talk:List of awards and nominations received by Meryl Streep#Awards descriptions. MarnetteD|Talk 18:35, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Can someone review my Audie Award Winners list article?[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Audie_Award_Winners

Hi. I created the above list article and submitted it for review. It lists the categories and winners for the Audie Awards that is an article that belongs to this group. Thanks!SJTatsu (talk) 16:47, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm familiar with the Audies and a big audiobook fan, and I create book award articles on Wikipedia. However I agree with the others this is not a good choice for Wikipedia, in current form, because there are so many categories and nominees it is essentially an industry PR vehicle. And what happens there is so much work to add entries every year, no one will keep it up to date, and even if so, after 5 or 10 years the article is so long it creates a technical problem. Better to just list the winners of each category. It will also need secondary sources ie. magazines and newspapers unaffiliated with the audies, author, Audible or publishers, that comment on the award in order to establish it is a notable award. -- GreenC 17:31, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Forbes lists[edit]

Are Forbes lists (such as top 100 most influential celebrities etc. ) and lists of similar standing to be included on Lists of awards and nominations received by individuals? If so, are they to be included in any awards count? Such as taking #1 to mean a win? Couldn't find anything about this in archives of this page NicklausAU 07:07, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Those are not awards but they are honors. Depending how notable the person is, if they already have lots of awards and honors these could be left out, but if they are up and comers it might make sense to include. #1 spot might also matter. Context sensitive. I would probably object to someone systematically adding every one ie. adding all 100 winners of the influential celebrities, it seems like spamming for Forbes and there are more important awards Wikipedia is missing. -- GreenC 13:01, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
CreenC So if they are an established celebrity with many awards, maybe just mention it in the lead without creating a table for it? And, does that still hold true if the subject in question is not well known in western culture? NicklausAU 21:54, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Well per WP:LEAD it's only for the most important things and you would have to gauge if this among that category or do they have other more important things than being in a list with 100 other people. It's hard to say without seeing it in context. The name "Forbes" carries cachet because of the Forbes 500, but it's also diluted by many sub-lists and so many people on them each year. -- GreenC 04:00, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
I appreciate the response. If you're at all interested in seeing it in context, this is the article. They have been high on one such list a few times and I've seen similar list positions mentioned in several similar awards lists for popular western artists, so yeah I'm not convinced which way to go. NicklausAU 11:20, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Given their high ranking and article focus on awards it seems alright to me. -- GreenC 23:42, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

RfC on lists of awardees[edit]

There's an RfC going on at Talk:Feynman Prize in Nanotechnology#RfC on list format on whether lists of awardees should be in a table or bulleted list format, and whether they should contain photographs and other supplementary columns. Feedback would be appreciated! Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 04:23, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

There seems to be a strong push to ban these kinds of articles from using tables or including photographs. Feedback on this proposal would be appreciated. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 04:46, 27 August 2018 (UTC)