Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Awards/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Category:Asteroids named as an award has been nominated for discussion

Category:Asteroids named as an award, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:11, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:Oklahoma Hall of Fame has been nominated for discussion

Category:Oklahoma Hall of Fame, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:12, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by Evita (1996 film)/archive1

The Evita award list is newly created and nominated for Featured list status. Please feel free to comment. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 12:19, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Notice to participants at this page about adminship

Many participants here create a lot of content, have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:47, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Beauty pageant winners

There is this discussion Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Beauty_Pageants#RFC_on_creation_of_consensus_standard related to beauty pageant winners that might be relavant to people in this project. John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:35, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Off topic

Hi I am very new to this, somewhat scary, but on the Wildlife Photographer of the Year wikipedia page I noticed the detail results only go to 1991, being a contestant in this competition, I have the printed portfolios for 1989 & 1990, which I can copy and send to anyone interested in entering this Data in and updating, or if given a template to fill out can enter the data and provide copies of the portfolio as well to be checked off for someone to upload. DarrylT (talk) 23:39, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

@DarrylT: I know Wikipedia has way too many pages, but this page is totally not relevant to your post. May I suggest you repost it the talk page of Wildlife Photographer of the Year, through frankly the odds that anyone else will read it soon and act are low. The best course of action is to follow SP:SOFIXIT, ie. do it yourself (because it may be years before someone else interested in this very topic wanders to Wikipedia's talk page on that topic, reads your post and replies). The portfolios would count as proper reliable citations, through I doubt we can upload them here due to copyright. Btw, I am not sure what is missing on that page that you can add, but if you need technical help (editing templates is not easy) don't hesitate to ping me. You can also ask for help at WP:TEAHOUSE. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:01, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Notability of Nautilus Book Awards and Independent Publisher Book Awards

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

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

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 prizes → Wikipedia: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 ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  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

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!

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 1200 drafts (0 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)

Physical awards

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

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?

• BreakTudo Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• 2017 BreakTudo Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

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

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?

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

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 (^talk⁄_contribs) 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 (^talk⁄_contribs) 01:21, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Input request

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)

Template:WikiProject Awards and prizes

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)

Can someone review my Audie Award Winners list article?

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)

RfC on lists of awardees

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 (^talk⁄_contribs) 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 (^talk⁄_contribs) 04:46, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Forbes lists

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)

Featured quality source review RFC

Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:46, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Request for help/review

Hi. Hoping this is an appropriate place to reach out, I'd like to request a peer review and/or advice on ways to improve the 2018 Nobel Peace Prize article. The article's quality rating is "stub," and, after seeing an example on this Project's article page, I changed the article's importance rating from "high" to "top". Since I'm not sure what's generally well known about the award and the 2018 laureates, I've erred on the side of caution by sourcing most statements and (perhaps too heavily) quoting sources. Any tips and advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance! Litjade (talk) 11:11, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

As a follow-up, I've nominated the article for Good Article review (WP:GAN). To start the review process, follow the link "start review" on Talk:2018 Nobel Peace Prize. For review instructions, see WP:GAREVIEW. Thanks in advance. —Litjade (talk) 17:19, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Notability (awards)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Notability (awards). DBigXrayᗙ 21:42, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Request on Information Updates for the "Shaw Prize"

Hi there! I would like to request a peer review and edit the following information for the Shaw Prize article:

1. As at today, 12 of the Nobel laureates – Jules Hoffmann, Bruce Beutler, Saul Perlmutter, Adam Riess, Shinya Yamanka, Robert Lefkowitz and Brian Schmidt, Jeffrey C Hall, Michael Rosbash, Michael W Young, Kip S Thourne, Rainer Weiss – were previous laureates of the Shaw Prize.

2. Board of Adjudicators: Frank H Shu (Chairman), Kenneth Young, Reinhard Genzel, Randy W Schekman, Timothy Gowers

3. Selection Committees 2018-2019:

Astronomy – Reinhard Genzel (Chairman), Chryssa Kouveliotou, John A Peacock, Scott Tremaine, Ewine Van Dishoeck

Life Science and Medicine – Randy W Schekman (Chairman), Bonnie L Bassler, Hans Clevers, Carol Greider, Richard Lifton, Xiaodong Wang, Huda Zoghbi

Mathematical Sciences – Timothy Gowers (Chairman), Hélène Esnault, Felix Otto, Paul Seidel, Wendelin Werner

Pn0824 (talk) 03:15, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

What categories of an adult award are notable?

The purpose of this RfC is to discuss which categories of an adult award are notable. As it is known, adult awards have more than a hundred categories and consequently by WP:INHERIT not all are notable.[1]

Which articles should be created? Which should be excluded? Which categories are encyclopedic and which ones fall into WP:NOT and should be taken from articles? There is a Gender bias on Wikipedia, since there are AVN articles of Best Actress, Best Supporting Actress, Actress Female Performer of the Year, but there are none about actors, directors or films? Guilherme Burn (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

• In my opinion, the notable categories are: Best Actor/Actress, Best Performer Male/Female/Foreigner, Best Director, Best Film and Halls of Fame.Guilherme Burn (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
• I am not convinced anything presented here indicates a gender bias in Wikipedia. Some awards receive more recognition and coverage than others.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:35, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
• I realize that English is not your native language. Do you mean notorious, which carries a negative connotation, or significant, as in "The person has won a well-known and significant industry award."? If it's the latter, maybe this RfC should be held at WT:Notability (people). — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 05:39, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

I made the change. It would be better if a native speaker who understood my proposal would lead the discussion.Guilherme Burn (talk) 19:07, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• I second the suggestion of holding this RfC at WT:Notability (people). K.e.coffman (talk) 18:37, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

WP 1.0 Bot Beta

Hello! Your WikiProject has been selected to participate in the WP 1.0 Bot rewrite beta. This means that, starting in the next few days or weeks, your assessment tables will be updated using code in the new bot, codenamed Lucky. You can read more about this change on the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team page. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 06:48, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Request for improvement of award articles for Star Awards

Hello,

I am proposing an improvement project for some improvement on articles pertaining to Star Awards for all articles, especially the pre-2005 articles, which I have not yet done so. It is basically changing from a list-form to the one seen similar to award-ceremonies (like the one in post-2005). I also got information for presenters and some resources from the Chinese version of Star Awards. The reason is because that not only the article is not only to improve the consistency of works, but also to fix proofing, and removing unnecessary red links that are still exist in these articles.

I had tried to seek help on manpower for the article like asking Unknown152438 and LMX97 but they were busy. I too, might be busy, but i took the chance to request a proposal to help out on improving the award articles, similar to the one seen in the Primetime Emmy Awards and Academy Awards.

I would also wish to do the same for Grammy Awards since they use a list-form instead of award-ceremony form. Would you initiate the improvement project?

Yours regards, (Sculture65 (talk) 10:27, 3 March 2019 (UTC))

P.S., this year marks the 25th (silver) anniversary of Star Awards, it would be so nice to improve the article with a fashion.

Music show wins in Awards sections

Discussion and survey at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Korea/Popular_culture#Are_music_show_wins_notable? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:53, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Academy Awards for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Academy Awards is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Academy Awards until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:41, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Gemini Awards

Does anyone know of a good source for the Canadian television Gemini Awards, which have been supplanted by the Canadian Screen Awards? I spent a bit of time working on a big table and then found out my source is no good. I haven't been able to find anything at the official site academy.ca/awards but maybe I'm not looking hard enough. – Reidgreg (talk) 20:12, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Recipients of Order of the Star of Italy - category?

Should there be a category for recipients of this award? If so, please would someone create it and add John Gilhooly. Thanks. PamD 07:15, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Awards and prizes categories

I have proposed renaming of the last four "Awards and prizes" categories; please see WP:CFDS within the next 48 hours. – Fayenatic London 09:01, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Scripps National Spelling Bee champions for featured list removal

I have nominated List of Scripps National Spelling Bee champions for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 11:59, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Some proposed changes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Food_Prize#Laureates

Information to be added or removed: Change "Founder and leader of East-West Seed..." to "Founder and honorary chairman of East-West Seed..." Explanation of issue: Mr Groot's current title is Honorary Chairman of East-West Seed. His son, Ard Groot, is Chairman and Bert van der Feltz is the company's President & CEO. References supporting change: BrenRoa (talk) 04:40, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

References

 Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards. If possible, please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. If you cannot edit the article's talk page, you can instead make your request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for edits to a protected page. —Nizolan ^{(talk · c.)} 16:05, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Update to title of Simon Groot

{{Connected contributor|User1=BrenRoa |U1-declared=yes| U1-otherlinks=(Optional) I am an employee of the company associated with the edit I am requesting.}}

Template intended for another article disabled to prevent miscategorisation —Nizolan ^{(talk · c.)} 02:48, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Fees!!

It is important to note that the fee for entering the competition is a whopping 122 euros (artists over 25 yrs old), and 97,6 euros (25 and under). They actually use the term "free theme" for submissions, ignoring the tremendous wealth gap this represents for a vast majority of artists. This is part of a mega cottage industry financed on the backs of struggling artists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reroot (talk • contribs) 00:32, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Award wins, nominations, and "pending" awards

Okay, so through various different pages and editing I've come across a question/issue with {{Infobox awards list}} and {{Infobox musician awards}}. Specifically, that there is no "pending" in either template, causing some editors to stick the whole damn template into the article space (example 2). There is also some discrepancy (mentioned but not dealt with here) about counting nominations even if they turned into wins, so I have two questions:

1. Should the "nominations" field of the awards lists contain nominations and wins? In other words, if an artist is nominated for 10 awards and won 4 of them, would we list that as (4/6) or (4/10)?
2. Should we list "pending" awards? To keep using Ariana as an example, the 2019 MTV Video Music Awards haven't happened yet and so the result is listed as "pending". In my opinion, she's still nominated, so these should be marked as "nominated" (but I have no issue going with consensus if people feel otherwise).

In other words, I'm mostly looking for a little more consistency between all of the various articles that use (or subst'ed) the awards templates. Primefac (talk) 22:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC) (please do not ping on reply)

• I'm not totally convinced that pending is needed in the summary, but if it stops stupid edits like the one you linked to, then adding it is worth it. Regarding your first question, I'm not sure what the correct way to go is. I'll add 2 more issues. I've long thought that manually updating the totals was a very bizarre way of handling this template, so at the sandbox of Template:Infobox actor awards I've added code for automatic calculations. However, that also requires manually inserting awards to the code, which while better than the current process, is still not good. Another editor also brought up an issue with alphabetizing the order with the manual awards, which in the current setup cannot happen. Both issues can be solved if the templates are converted to Lua. However, as the infobox module is not setup for access from other modules I wasn't sure how to even start that. --Gonnym (talk) 12:04, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
• 1: No. 2: No. Wins are their own parameter. If there's a template where they aren't, then fix it. Pending stuff is hypothetical, thus see WP:NOT#CRYSTAL and WP:NODEADLINE. WP will have info on the award after it is in fact awarded. (It's important in this particular context to remember that recipients of awards can decline them.) — AReaderOutThataway ^t/_c 15:51, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
• Q1: Yes, because a nominations totals is literally the total number of nominations the subject has received regardless of how many were won. 5 Grammy nominations received and 2 won makes an artist a 5x Grammy nominee and 2x winner - not a 3x nominee (the amount of nominations not won). Please refer to my comments on this here. Wins and nominations have their own parameters that should reflect the mere totals of each. Not including the total number of nominations received in the infobox nominations totals confuses and does not service readers, nor does it accurately reflect the subject's awards total history. Lapadite (talk) 18:19, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Q2: No. I don't find a pending parameter in the infobox useful and it's just unnecessary work for editors. The pending awards haven't happened therefore there's no reason to reference them at all in the infobox until the results are announced. Lapadite (talk) 18:19, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

• Note there is now a discussion at the template talk. I'll probably transclude this section but since now most of the "awards" templates have been merged into {{Infobox awards list}} it might be best to continue the conversation there. Primefac (talk) 20:05, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
• 1: Yes. 2: No. I tend to read this as "X wins from Y nominations". Nominations include wins and losses. I would tend not to include pending nominations because this would offset the implied win-to-nomination ratio. Whatever is decided, a footnote should clearly and concisely explain what is presented. – Reidgreg (talk) 14:42, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
• No, and No. It's sorely reader-confusing to count the same thing as both a win and a nomination. The entire point of tracking nominations at all is that they're losses but for something that even being nominated for it contributes to notability. If necessary, add an autogenerated footnote that "nominations" doesn't redundantly include wins. Look at is this way: In a serial killer template, we would not include a murder in both a list of "murders" and a list of "attempted murders", re-counting the murder as a "successful attempt". Or another way to look at it: the very meaning of a nomination that wasn't a loss (i.e., not just a nomination) is that it was a win. That a nomination phase happened before the win is inherent in any awards process that involves nominations. Another way to look at it: If I have two pizzas, and I cook and eat one, it no longer makes sense to say I have two pizzas; one of the pizzas has transformed into a mass of goop in my stomach. On the second matter, see WP:NOT#CRYSTAL; no award or nomination should be listed as "pending", only listed after it is confirmed, since these things can change.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:52, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion (Writers Guild of America Award)

Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:Writers Guild of America Awards 2019#Requested move 23 January 2020, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, Wikipedical (talk) 20:05, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Template talk:Infobox awards list

Editors of this project may be interested in a discussion at Template talk:Infobox awards list, concerning the content of the template's footnote. – Teratix ₵ 09:46, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Nominated Tony Award for Best Featured Actor in a Play for demotion

I have nominated Tony Award for Best Featured Actor in a Play for demotion at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Tony Award for Best Featured Actor in a Play/archive1. This notice serves as service of such. Therapyisgood (talk) 08:55, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Demotion of Tony Award for Best Featured Actress in a Play

Formal notice that Tony Award for Best Featured Actress in a Play is up for demotion at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Tony Award for Best Featured Actress in a Play/archive1. Therapyisgood (talk) 09:19, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

RfC on exceptions to WP:OCAWARD

As an interested party, I am providing notice to this WikiProject about a new Request for Proposal that is proposing an exception to the guideline WP:OCAWARD in the policy Overcategorization. The Rfc will be here when the system gets around to adding it: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines. And also in the proposals Rfc. However, it is ready for comment directly in the guideline talk page: Wikipedia talk:Overcategorization#RfC on exceptions to WP:OCAWARD. Your insights would be appreciated. Thank you. dawnleelynn^(talk) 20:05, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

A better linking model has been created for Nobel Laureate together with Nobelprize.org

We have now the possibility to easier link Nobelprize.org using a template and Wikidata. For background and implementation see Version 1 is now implemented for creating links in Wikipedia using Nobel Laureate API ID (P8024) and please help push this message out to Wikipedia languages that can benefit from using it and let me know if you need help with creating new Templates - Salgo60 (talk) 22:29, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Format of book awards lists with shortlists

There doesn't seem to be an agreed "best practice" for lists of winners of awards which have shortlists - interested parties might like to join the discussion at Talk:Wainwright Prize. PamD 12:42, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Nobel laureates as a research subject

I just came across this study that analyzes Nobel laureates from various perspectives over time, e.g. in terms of their geographic and institutional as well as collaboration/ training patterns. It also has some useful figures, particularly in the supplement, though some of these have been subject to a correction. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

References

Category:XBIZ Award winners has been nominated for deletion

Category:XBIZ Award winners has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Right cite (talk) 17:26, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Category:AVN Award winners has been nominated for deletion

Category:AVN Award winners has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Right cite (talk) 17:26, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Template talk:Infobox award § Using image for current award rather than text

 You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Infobox award § Using image for current award rather than text. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Category talk:Wikipedia barnstar templates

Is this assessment legitimate? I don't think Wikipedia barnstars are in your scope. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 20:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

• Anybody? 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:53, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

@1234qwer1234qwer4: Looks to me like someone forgot "Wikipedia" in WP:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards. @Awkwafaba: Any thoughts as the one that tagged it? -2pou (talk) 19:05, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

I've removed the banner and hope this is okay. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:22, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Dev Patel

This list was previously totally unsourced save for two refs in the lead. I have since sourced the entire table and expanded the lead somewhat. I would like to possibly nominate it for featured list status one day but until then I was hoping someone could take a look and see if there are any further improvements to be made that I have missed. Here doesn't seem to be very active but I don't know where else would be equally appropriate to ask. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 23:09, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Bias in award importance

Browsing the list of Top-importance awards Category:Top-importance awards articles there seem to be some very strange entries.

The most egregious is the large set of US-state level Emmy awards. This is probably not so much the result of systemic bias, more the unnoticed behaviour of a single editor ten years ago who has not been corrected since. The criterion at WP:WPAW#Rating articles is that "Top" should go to awards which are "familiar worldwide", with the excellent example of the Nobel prizes. So I'm asking now if there is any reason why this set of US-state level Emmys should not be immediately re-graded?

More broadly, I find some awards which are significant in my country in their field and are known to some extent internationally are listed as Low. In general, articles about non-USA awards are one, two, or three levels importance levels lower than their USA equivalents, lower if the country is not English-speaking. For example, all the Theatre award articles, such as Molière Award contain a sentence such as "The Molière Awards are considered the highest French theatre honour, the equivalent to the American Tony Award, the British Olivier Award and the Spanish Premios Max." Yet the importance ratings are currently Tony:Top, Olivier:High, Moliere:Mid. (Max is not yet rated.) This is just one example, but it does have the appearance of systemic bias. --Monxton (talk) 18:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps there is nobody here any more? I did receive some support, but no response whatsoever here. I have moved those US regional awards for television programs out of the Nobel prize class, but there is still work to be done if anyone is taking these importance classifications seriously. If not, perhaps they should be eliminated. --Monxton (talk) 20:58, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

There will never be agreement on what is "top" importance. I neve pay attention to those things. Also these categories were originally meant for the purpose of what the Project is supposed to focus on for improvement, due to page hits and other things ie. important for Wikipedia management purposes, more so than any objective notion of an actual scale of importance, but that distinction long ago evaporated, and this project like many others is not very active anyway. -- GreenC 03:31, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Firstly, thank you for bothering to respond. I can certainly agree that there is going to be subjectivity in assessment. I don't agree with an apparent implication that cultural bias is unimportant.

The table I linked to already WP:WPAW#Rating articles fairly clearly sets out assessment criteria for awards articles. Are you familiar with that table? That's where I got my understanding of what importance was intended to mean. If as you say importance is about about page hits and so on, then since there are automated tools which will measure that sort of thing much better, why have human assessments at all? If they are meaningless, then shouldn't they be eliminated? --Monxton (talk) 23:53, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

The table says why it is important, for project management purposes ie. let's focus on these articles to improve as a project team because we, the few dozen members of this team, believe these to to be important. It's not meant in the sense of a general purpose list of most important awards for general consumption. -- GreenC 20:34, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I get that the table is about the importance of articles, not about the importance of awards per se, but that seems an unnecessary nuance when the writers of the table use the article as a proxy for its subject. For example "Subject is one of the most highly recognised awards in its field. This should be familiar to most people internationally."

As you say, the project is not very active, so if the members choose to believe that their regional US television program awards deserve the same focus as a Nobel prize, I will leave them to it. Thanks. --Monxton (talk) 01:08, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

The person who added the tags appears to be Canyouhearmenow, so maybe they are interested in joining the discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:47, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

NATAS itself looks at these awards as extremely important and therefore their importance was noted into the article a long time ago. While the awards are in fact regional versus country wide, they still encompass an area of 50% of the country, they still are broadcasted on television as an awards broadcast with commercial sponsors and a legitimate airtime slot just like the Primetime, Daytime, Sports and Special Event Emmys. They simply cannot acknowledge all of the contributors in one broadcast so they allow the regions to do that for them. So, the academy looks at Emmy Award winners as Emmy Award winners no matter on what level they receive the honor on. Being a former member of the board of directors for NATAS for 6 years we never distinguished regionals to be less important simply because they reached a lesser audience. [I also see you continuing to use the term "International or Internationally"] The awards are subjective and cannot be considered or classified by importance as "International" as they are US based awards. There are programs that are outside of the US that can be recognized but that can be done on a regional level as well. Regional areas that are close to Canada for instance sometimes incorporate Canadian programming into the awards because they are broadcasting across the US boundaries. Canyouhearmenow 03:08, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by. GreenC has been arguing that the importance of the articles does not necessarily reflect the importance of the awards, but that doesn't seem to be your POV. Let me just reiterate as GreenC says, that importance ranking doesn't make any difference to the presentation of the articles to the reader.

I'm going to refer you again to the table at WP:WPAW#Rating articles, because that is where international awareness is noted as a key attribute of importance. It's not an idea that came out of my head as you may be implying, it's from the heart of this project. If you read the first few entries on this talk page Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Awards/Archive 1 you can see how the criteria were discussed and agreed. The project asserts that they expect there to be "about 10" awards in the top category. Also that subordinate articles, for example about individual years of the Nobel prizes, or prizes for smaller regions would be in lower importance levels than the singular highest level article, in your case the Emmy Award article.

You know, if these American television awards have so many awardees every year that they can't be dealt with in a single broadcast, that's pretty conclusive evidence that they are only significant within their field and country. A top-importance award, like a Nobel prize, is one that makes headline news worldwide. --Monxton (talk) 05:43, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

I completely understand what you are trying to say. That is why Wikipedia allows editors a certain level of discretion in an effort to bring what they feel is an importance to the subject. I do agree that an Emmy Award is not in anyway as important as a Nobel Prize, however, I think what GreenC is saying is true as well. Editors pay very little attention to the importance tags but rather to the subject of the article itself by building it to prove its importance. I dont know that I agree with having these tags at all because they are subjective to opinion. People who are the recipients of these awards surely feel that their award is just as important to them as someone who wins a Nobel. We can also not reduce their work simply because we feel that it doesn't match up to the level of a Nobel. To them it does and in the eyes of the public it is. When I created these articles years ago I did so because there was a huge outcry from Emmy Award winners who were not being recognized properly. SO when I tagged the articles I did so simply because of the guidelines put in place during that time. Since that time, I have not paid much attention to the importance tag but rather to the quality of the article. So, I again understand where you are coming from and agree as a whole but I also agree with our brother editor that we should be looking at the quality of the subject rather than the importance of its tag. Canyouhearmenow 02:21, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

"Everybody has won, and all must have prizes."? Sure, awards are subjective. We >could< edit all the award articles and re-classify every one as Top importance according to your argument. But I think the man on the Clapham omnibus would reasonably recognise some awards as being more significant than others. This discussion has strayed from my original point, that those people assigning importance to award articles appear to be displaying cultural bias, in particular a USA-centric bias, and have not followed the assessment criteria of this WikiProject. However I am not implying that you (Canyouhearmenow) have any responsibility for that; after all the only articles you assessed were those you had yourself written (I don't think that's actually how it's supposed to work ) and the claim that every one is Top importance, while it could be described as bias, is a rather different kind. I appreciate that you took the trouble to respond. --Monxton (talk) 00:14, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

(Monxton) I believe if you look at the articles I created I had very little to do with the importance tags. I created the talk pages if memory serves me correctly, but I dont believe I set the importance tags outside of what was already set or what the guidelines required at that time. My goal was to get the articles started and have editorial help to build them. However, again, I understand your argument and as I have clearly stated, "I do not feel certain awards are greater than a Nobel" However, given the recipients point of view as well was the academies that present these awards they would clearly argue the importance of the award, the recipients and the quality of work submitted for awards considerations. So, again it is subjective and lent to the editors interpretations. I believe we are going around in a circle here. We are clearly stating similar views but in a different way. The importance tags IMO is non-essential to the articles. They rarely serve a purpose and are usually overlooked by the editors working on the subjects. So, there is my argument and I dont know that there is anything more I can add to this discussion other than I believe wholeheartedly that the quality of the article should be where the attention is placed and not the importance of its importance tag. IMO... Canyouhearmenow 00:27, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Canyouhearmenow I did think we had finished here. You seem to be an experienced editor, and I apologise for assuming you would know how to view page history. Here's one example: Ohio Valley Emmy Awards; I have not checked every single article but all those I have reviewed were similar. --Monxton (talk) 00:59, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

(Monxton) While it is true that I placed the talk page there and I put the importance tag there per the page requirement, I did not however assess the page myself but rather left that for a fellow editor to do so. I simply put the tag there per the page requirement as do many page creators on Wikipedia. For some reason I feel as though you are trying to find exception with this issue? If you are that passionate about the tag pages then by all means change them and explain the change in your summary and then allow other editors to deal with it as they see fit. I have already given my point of view and at this point I just do not see a reason to continue on with this issue. I hope you well in your editing endeavors. Canyouhearmenow 03:27, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Canyouhearmenow: You are correct that it is common for the author to insert the template, which draws the article to the attention of a patroller. It would however be perverse to assess your own article by filling in the fields of the template. In other words, you may insert {{WikiProject Awards|importance= |class=}}. Whereas what you actually inserted was {{WikiProject Awards|importance=Top |class=Start}}. By doing so you assessed your own page. You have been shown the evidence, please stop denying it. --Monxton (talk) 05:00, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

I think it is easy to identify the top award in a group (Top TV award of the UK, top military award of China) but when you go across those categories, it gets pretty subjective. I work more in the category space but I have occasionally add the class and importance of articles I have created, which probably isn't best practice. RevelationDirect (talk) 16:12, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I agree on both your points. If you are an expert in the field, then you may be the best person to assess your article's importance ... but if all your own articles are self-assessed at the highest possible level there may be something a bit wrong. I was more bothered really by the persistent denial of what happened. Anyway, I have now restored the Top-level to something more like what was originally intended, I hope. I probably won't go any deeper. --Monxton (talk) 23:10, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Help needed at Entertainment Reference Desk

We could do with some expert opinion at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2021 January 1#Red_pin_badge_on_lapel_of_conductor_Riccardo_Muti_in_2021_Wiener_Philharmoniker_New_Year's_day_concert; any assistance will be most gratefully received. Alansplodge (talk) 16:35, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

James Beard Foundation Award

I've asked here if the James Beard Foundation Award should be split. Feedback welcome! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 03:36, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

AMAA Who's Who in the Martial Arts Hall of Fame

Could someone from this WikiProject take a look at AMAA Who's Who in the Martial Arts Hall of Fame and assess it? It appears to have been created directly in the mainspace. Since it didn’t go through WP:AFC and didn’t have a talk page until to today, it never seems to have been assessed. There’s no article about the American Martial Arts Alliance itself, it’s a bit odd that there would an article one of its awards ceremonies or its HOF. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:11, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

American Music Award navboxes

Does anyone else think the number of navboxes being created for winners of various American Music Award is leaning towards overkill? See Category:American Music Award templates. Are they needed at all? Are they needed for every award category? A CfD for a similar Grammy Award navboxes occurred in 2014 with a consensus to delete all but the major award categories (although some from that group have since been recreated). It just seems like something that can quickly lead to template bloat.

Personally, I would limit such navboxes for US awards to the four majors (EGOT). I mean, the number of navboxes in some actor articles is a joke (Cate Blanchett has over 40). It seems like there's one for every city's film critics association, such as those in Category:Houston Film Critics Society Awards templates and Category:San Diego Film Critics Society Awards templates. Now I'm going off on a tangent, but perhaps these types of template creations should be reeled in a bit. Thanks. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 05:13, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I agree with you 100%. That Cate Blanchett example is mind boggling... How does that help someone navigate pages? Not sure what to do about it, though, other than nominate them for TfD... I don't even know how you'd track their creation. Each one of those templates, and even the category you linked to are not tagged with the WikiProject Awards banner. Maybe someone could try and start and RfC to adopt. -2pou (talk) 07:39, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Jeff Skoll Honours and awards

Hello! I've asked here if editors could review the appropriateness of including additional recognition to the article for film producer and philanthropist Jeff Skoll. I welcome feedback. I have a conflict of interest because I work with the Jeff Skoll Group. I am careful to build consensus in place of directly editing the article. Thank you. JSG Lindsey (talk) 17:34, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

New dedicated delsort

I have created a new delsort category dedicated to awards, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Awards (WP:DELSORT/AWARDS). Surprised this didn't already exist. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:38, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Chronological order vs Alphabetical order

Is there some rule in an award guideline that says what order a list of awards should be in? Most lists are done chronologically, earliest year first, and many of the list of awards of so-and-so are listed by award name. It looks a little funny not to be sorted by year. I know it can be changed on a desktop by clicking the column header but it would seem to me the first instance that hits you in the face should go year by year. I am having this discussion at Talk:List of awards and nominations received by Elliot Page. To be honest, as a reader I would like to see it ordered by year and within the year ordered alphabetical by nominated work. Then if a reader wants to see it by award they can alter the column. Right now it seems backwards. Is there an award guideline that mandates what way we do it? Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

The examples I gave of recently-promoted featured lists with the alphabetical ordering are: Brad Pitt, Dua Lipa, Emilia Clarke and Exo (these being the first four I looked at). I'm agreed that chronology makes sense but the precedent is alphabetical so I'd like to hear the reason (if there is one...) for how that become the standard. Then it would be good to apply any changed standard as uniformly as possible on similar lists. Pinging ChrisTheDude in case he has information or an opinion as I've seen him around this area of FL a lot. — Bilorv (talk) 20:07, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

TBH I have no strong opinion either way. One could argue that it would be better to have them chronologically to track the person's career, but equally one could argue that all instances of an award should go together so that it's quick and easy to see that they won, say, three Oscars, four BRIT awards, etc..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:14, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

That can make sense if there are four or five awards, but there are 48 awards on this particular page. I mean the Fangoria Chainsaw Awards? The Washington D.C. Area Film Critics Association Awards? The IndieWire Critics Poll? That's not even an award, it's a poll. It's not all that easy to see how many awards a person won when there are 48 awards which could likely grow. Most readers may want to know if a person won or was nominated for an Academy Award, a Golden Globe, or a British Academy Film Awards. I could see those with their own special heading. But most of these are pretty small awards and doing it chronologically on first view I'd bet is what most readers want. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:48, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Help with Sherwin-Williams Awards and recognition

Hi, my name is Mira and I am the employee representative for Sherwin-Williams here on Wikipedia. I posted a recent request on the Sherwin-Williams talk page to collaborate with editors on improvements to the current article's Awards and recognition section, while following the site's guidelines for editors like me with a conflict of interest. As an employee, I will refrain from editing the article and related articles directly. Generally, I'm proposing that the section include a list of major awards and rankings the company has received from Forbes in recent years. The request came on the heels of a recent update to the section where a helpful editor removed some poorly sourced content identified through Talk page discussions. The same editor has weighed in to say they do not think the list of Forbes awards is worthy of inclusion. I'm posting here to gather thoughts from others about what kinds of recognition are acceptable and will, of course, defer to the community's consensus. Below is the list of Forbes awards I'm proposing for inclusion in the live article. My full request and related discussion can be viewed at the Sherwin-Williams Talk page.

• Forbes awards:
  • America's Best Employers 2021 (#50)
  • Best Employers for Veterans 2020 #106)
  • America's Best Employers for New Grads, 2020 (#13)
  • America's Best Employers By State 2020
  • Best Employers for Women 2020 (#248)
  • Global 2000 2020 (#448)
  • Best Employers for Diversity 2020 (#435)
  • Top Regarded Companies 2019 (#239)
  • America's Largest Public Companies 2018 (#148)

Thanks in advance for any thoughts or guidance editors here may have to offer. MiraSherwin-Williams (talk) 23:24, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

They appear to all be listicles as opposed to actual awards, and aren't really covered by reliable secondary sources outside of Forbes, atleast not that I could tell from a quick Google search of 3 lists picked at random. I did find minimal coverage from some Indian news outlets, but most search results otherwise are press releases from the companies who make it on these lists. The only one I'd say is maybe worth mentioning in the article is the Global 2000 2020, but even that would be a stretch because I just generally don't see what makes any of these notable enough to mention. If there was a vote, I'd say no, to all of it. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 01:17, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Link spaming

Any way the project can limit the amount of over links /template spam.Moxy- 02:28, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Template talk:Infobox award#Producer parameter- EP?

Looking for helpful input in regards to the 'producer' parameter for Template:Infobox award. Any help/input would be greatly appreciated. Magitroopa (talk) 06:31, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Meritorious Artist of Hungary?

While stub-sorting Anna Czóbel I corrected the spelling of the red link Meritorius Artist of Hungary to Meritorious Artist of Hungary but it is still a red link. I see there are two categories: Category:Merited artists of the Republic of Hungary and Category:Artists of Merit of the Hungarian People's Republic: are these identical? If so, they need to be combined. If not, could someone annotate the categories to make it clear which of them, if either, relates to "Meritorious Artist..."? I've tried to look at the Hungarian language wikipedia but just got more confused. I've made a similar post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hungary. PamD 19:15, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

It's been pointed out to me there that these categories are for two different countries across time. We still have the problem that the categories refer to awards for which there is no article, nor even a mention in Merited Artist. PamD 09:39, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

European Tree of the Year need update

I am a German wiki editor and last month I wrote a comprehensive update of the German article "Europäischer Baum des Jahres". In Wikimedia Commons now has a lot of freely available images related to the trees under the category European Tree of the Year. Today, the live award ceremony can be seen under this Channel. I propose an update of the English-language page and would be happy if someone could contribute.--Cookroach (talk) 10:25, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Automatic short description at Infobox award

Feel free to contribute to the discussion about adding automatic short descriptions to {{Infobox award}} at Template talk:Infobox award#Automatic short description. --Trialpears (talk) 17:29, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

For the interested

I created Africa Food Prize, feel free to improve. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:41, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Greta Thunberg § proposal to split section for honors

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Greta Thunberg § proposal to split section for honors. Sean Stephens (talk) 11:33, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Prix Versailles for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Prix Versailles is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prix Versailles until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. I am posting here in the hope that page watchers will be able to provide evidence on whether the award is notable or not. TSventon (talk) 22:06, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

A wikidata template which provides informations on laureates

Wikidata provides information on awards but if you want to learn about laureates, you need to write SPARQL queries (and this is often difficult).

I've designed a wikidata template (d:Template:TP award) which provides useful queries for templates. It can be easily added to talk pages in Wikidata using d:Template:Item documentation (just add {{Item documentation}}). See example d:Talk:Q1624297.

I think that it could be useful to complete Wikipedia articles about awards.

Tell me if you find it useful and feel free to give me feedback. PAC2 (talk) 07:39, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Next Manga Award#Requested move 9 August 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Next Manga Award#Requested move 9 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 05:21, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Eisner Award#Requested move 17 August 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Eisner Award#Requested move 17 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject.  — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 11:36, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of Nobel laureates affiliated with Princeton University/archive2

I have nominated List of Nobel laureates affiliated with Princeton University for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. TompaDompa (talk) 01:48, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Split proposal

There is a split propasal pertaining to WP:Barnstars. The proposal can be found here, thank you. Jerm (talk) 20:56, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion at Template talk:Table cell templates § Color change in "Nominated"

 You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Table cell templates § Color change in "Nominated". RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Shared nominees in category column

Per several featured lists promoted within the last few years, including this, this, this and this, there are many instances where shared nominees are listed in the category column. However, on Park Min-young, user @Paper9oll does not think this logical. I, on the other hand, believe that it is 100% fine when formatting it in that way and it makes sorting much cleaner, where it makes all categories for a single work sorted together instead of disjointed in the table. Are any inputs available for either formats? ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 06:14, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Disagree with the format used by various FL on which Nkon21 likely referenced from as well. The format is obviously broken, make zero sense, and doesn't correlate with the column headers. Firstly, there's no doubt a big differences between the Western list and Korean list, for western list, only the work's title are listed (only 1 has nominee name in Work column which doesn't make sense to me since the actor name is not a work ... the name of the character they played is a work, while another one simply has N/A), whereas for Korean list, a mixture of the actor name and/or work's title are listed since certain category are not awarded based on the actor's work for instance popularity award (that's how Korean award ceremony works; don't ask me why ... I don't plan how the organizer decide the category). Secondly, the layout/formatting/data handling in Park Min-young article is 100% "idiot/fool"-proof or self-explanatory in my POV in which category column means the category name, nominee / work (read/pronounced nominee or work) column means the name of the actor(s) and/or the work's title, hence it's 100% ridiculous in my opinion to SLAP nominee name (the actor name) into the category column when there's already a nominee / work column. Lastly, the layout/formatting/data handling in particular concerning the Category column and Nominee / Work column is also used by List of awards and nominations received by BTS which is also FL-class, regardless whether subject/person is actor nor singer nor entertainer nor musician nor director, etc, it's still Award and nominations table as a whole. Hence, I believe WP:IAR applies in this instance, and broken layout/formatting/data handling and/or broken logic in other articles which slapped nominee's name into the self-explanatory category column also needs to be fixed. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 06:52, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I have to say I agree with Paper9oll here. Having "(with [Actor name])" in the category column appears to illogically suggest that "[Award Name] (with [Actor name])" is the name of the award given, though we know this isn't the case. Having "(with [Actor name])" in the nominee/works column takes away any chance of confusion. Alex (talk) 07:06, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't think that it's confusing in any form, and if that's what several FLs have gone with than I don't think it presents itself to be a problem. Paper9oll, just because you disagree with something does not make it broken; when it actually breaks the formatting than you can call it broken. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 18:58, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Agreed with Alex. It's obviously logically broken, broken doesn't have to mean the table is not rendering in the expected behavior. Several FLs using it doesn't means it's correct logically, which I was why I said it should also be corrected. By your logic, I pictured that it's perfectly okay to slap the nominee name and/or work title into the category because why not several FLs are doing it, maybe also add references into the mix then and make it a "salad party", even though the Reference column already exist so does the poor "Nominee / Work" column. Why not, also rename Category to Category / Nominee or Category (Nominee) then, while still having the poor Nominee / Work column there like it's not, seem perfect, 100% opposite of "idiot/fool"-proof, 100% opposite of self-explanatory, and lastly should be introduced into more "logically broken articles" to make them "not logically broken". — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 01:47, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

If I may, in music, an artist/their song/album/music video can be nominated, so a column showing the various names/titles nom'd is necessary. With actors, generally speaking, it's mostly themselves that are nom'd and no one/nothing else (though shared noms obv occur), so I guess rather than having a col spanning 30 or 40 rows to indicate "Herself" or "Himself" (as we see on solo artist award pages), it's excluded altogether. While I understand the possible reasoning behind it, I think shared noms (on the above and for PMY) and any add. cmmts in the Cat. col should be cited as a footnote (as appears to have been done for some of the earlier entries in Theron's table), rather than stated next to the cat. title in brackets. The column still is "Category" after all, and an actor is a nominee, not a category. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 04:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:AwardsInCenturyHeader

Template:AwardsInCenturyHeader has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. AdrianHObradors (talk) 19:02, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Peabody Awards BLP inclusion

I have opened a discussion here, about possibly standardising if production Peabody Awards are listed for individuals named in the citation, which may also concern this project. Kingsif (talk) 11:27, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates § Pulitzer Prizes

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates § Pulitzer Prizes. Flagging for this project because if the nomination succeeds, it may set a precedent for WP:ITNR to post the Pulitzers each year. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:31, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Vodafone Ghana Music Awards#Requested move 4 May 2022

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Vodafone Ghana Music Awards#Requested move 4 May 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 16:11, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Requesting input

Requesting input at an RFC concerning who awards medals page. GoodDay (talk) 18:22, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

List of winners and shortlisted authors of the Booker Prize

There is a proposal about the scope and potential renaming of this article, for which other editors' input is welcome. MartinPoulter (talk) 15:02, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Nominations ref

Please see discussion at User talk:Carlobunnie#Winners ref, and edit summaries of List of awards and nominations received by Sandra Bullock, Yet to Come (The Most Beautiful Moment), and List of awards and nominations received by BTS

Should nominations have a ref that only includes nominations, or a ref that includes both nominations and winners. Thanks, Indagate (talk) Indagate (talk) 19:02, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Awards and accessibility under Vector 2022, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. This discussion is probably more directly relevant to this WikiProject, but since this talk page gets minimal responses and I noticed the issues on film lists first, I placed the discussion there. Thank you. RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:09, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Punctuation/formatting of award titles

Is there a standard style for writing an award title in prose? Does it need punctuation? e.g. which of the following (if any) are correct?

• He won the Best Dressed Wikipedian award.
• He won the "Best Dressed Wikipedian" award.
• He won the 'Best Dressed Wikipedian' award.
• He won the Best Dressed Wikipedian award.

Thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 17:13, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Feature list removal discussion

I have nominated BBC Young Sports Personality of the Year for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

1980 New Year Honours - where are the MBEs?

I can't find the London Gazette listing for Gloria Cameron (aka Florence Cameron): see https://newspaperarchive.com/other-articles-clipping-jan-03-1980-3729948/. She is listed OK in The Times, but the civilian MBEs don't seem to be in the issue of London Gazette which is linked from the article. Any ideas? PamD 19:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments are used by Wikipedia editors to rate the quality of articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project decides to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:38, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Deprecated language in citations in UK honours lists

There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Orders, Decorations, and Medals/Archive 7#Deprecated language in citations for UK honours about whether citations should be updated to today's language, eg changing the 1980 "For service to the disabled." to "For service to disabled people." Members of this Wikiproject may have a view: please comment there. PamD 17:11, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Charlie Puth#Awards and nominations

In the above section on the Charlie Puth BLP, user Efernandez18 created an awards show entry called iHeartRadio Titanium Awards, for two radio spins awards Puth apparently received from IHR, in February. However this is not an actual ceremony or award show of any kind. From google searching, the Titanium Award was presented at the 2018 iHRMAs for the first time (per an iHeart press rel) and subsequent recipients were awarded throughout each year by IH, not at the actual IHRAs. I adjusted the additions with appropriate sourcing for both entries, but Efernandez18 changed it again a week later to what is presently seen in the table. He does not seem to care that it not an actual award show/ceremony or that one of the entries remains unsourced. Can anyone advise the best way to handle this? -- Carlobunnie (talk) 18:13, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

BVTA - Behind the Voice Actors Awards

Hi - I am drafting an article on the New Zealand animation studio Mukpuddy Animation and found one of the actors in an animation Mukpuddy produced were nominated for a BTVA award, but can not find anything useful about BTVA. Is this an insignificant award? There is nothing on wiki about BTVA or in mainstream media I can find. They are cited in a number of articles. Any help would be appreciated. NealeWellington (talk) 05:30, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Defining Category:Awards by year of establishment

The vast majority of the award categories have a category for the year the award was established and that typically means the first year the award is issued. If you research almost any of those articles though, the award planning began in a prior year like with the Dantzig Prize (1979 vs 1982) and the Tucker Prize (1985 vs 1988).

My thinking is that readers would see the first year the award was actually issued as defining and that's what they'd navigate by. This would be similar to Category:Buildings and structures by year of completion which has the same issue with the foundation being laid in a prior year.

If you have a different perspective, let me know so we can discuss further! - RevelationDirect (talk) 19:43, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Sumo trophies

Hello everyone, I've almost finished a draft article on trophies in professional sumo and I'd like to have your opinion on it. For the moment it's available in my sandbox but I'm thinking of posting it as a draft to get more opinions on it rather than posting it directly into main space. - OtharLuin (talk) 10:13, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

@OtharLuin: I know nothing about sumo and I'm not good at copy editing but a few high-level pointers:

1. I corrected some spelling errors in the intro and with some headings, but you might want to run this through an English word processor to find others.
2. The intro is sort of long for a list article and I'm wondering if this is really two articles: List of sumo awards and Sumo award ceremonies. (I don't know anything about sumo though, so take that with a grain of salt!)
3. Stylistically, most list grids I've seen just have a blank if there is no picture; I haven't seen others use File:No photo available.svg heavily. If that's common with similar articles or you love them, go ahead and keep them.

Hope those suggestions help! (And, if they don't, just ignore them.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:14, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

That's exactly the kind of feedback I was looking for, I was wondering the same thing about the usefulness of the intro but all in all I think it belongs here, being too short to be its own article. In any case, thank you very much, it's been very useful - OtharLuin (talk) 06:28, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Brief "How to contribute, join, and ask for help in WikiProject Awards"

As a newcomer, in order to foster a more inclusive and accessible environment for newcomers, I propose the addition of a short introductory note on how to become a contributor, join the project, and submit page requests or drafts on Wikipedia.

Experienced contributors understand the intricacies of navigating Wikipedia and WikiProject Awards's processes, but it's crucial to acknowledge that new users might not be well-versed in the platform's conventions and guidelines. By incorporating a brief introductory guide on the landing page of the WikiProject Awards or a redirect, we can empower and encourage those unfamiliar with the Wikipedia world to actively participate in its collaborative editing process.

The suggested note could cover various topics, such as:

1. Becoming a Contributor: Provide a step-by-step explanation of how to contribute to the WikiProject Awards even if one's name is not listed in the contributor list.
2. Joining the Project: Explain the concept of WikiProjects and how they enable contributors to collaborate on specific subjects or topics of interest. Outline the benefits of joining a project and offer guidance on how to find relevant WikiProjects to join.
3. Submitting Page Requests or Drafts: Clarify the process of submitting a draft for review with some initial proposed ranking according to the detailed metrics. Can link to instructions on how to create a draft, provide proper citations, and adhere to Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Additionally, emphasize the importance of patience when waiting for review and constructive feedback.

By including this introductory note, we can bridge the gap between experienced contributors and newcomers, fostering a more welcoming environment for those who are less familiar with the Wikipedia ecosystem. It will promote transparency, encourage participation, and ultimately enhance the diversity and quality of content on Wikipedia.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this proposal and how we can collectively improve the onboarding experience for new contributors on Wikipedia. LightBringerToday (talk) 20:07, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

@LightBringerToday: All for ways to make this Wikiproject accessible to more editors and I really like 1 and 3. (Not opposed to 2 though, but not sure if there is a practical difference if editors say they're a member on their user page or not.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:42, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Glad to hear. Perhaps the community can help suggest what next steps could be? LightBringerToday (talk) 01:05, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Notability Question

For the purposes of lists of Alumni and whether a person should have an article, what are the feelings on awardees of

1. ) Bronze Wolf
2. ) Silver Buffalo
3. ) Distinguished Eagle Scout Award

Thanx.Naraht (talk) 19:09, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Eh... probably not? My thought process is basically that these awards are by scouts, largely for scouts (the Silver Buffalo can be given to anyone, but seems to be primarily given to scouts). That being said, a lot of the older Wolf and Eagle award recipients appear to have articles, so there might be some measure of already-reached notability if one is receiving this award. Primefac (talk) 10:54, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

FL Removal Review

I have nominated BBC Sports Personality of the Year Coach Award for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:31, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Add to FT

Is it possible to add List of Indian Nobel laureates to Wikipedia:Featured topics/Nobel laureates? The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:30, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Nobel Laureate Signature

I do not know how active is this project but would it be ok to make an article about the Nobel Laureate Signature (ACS)? [2] what are some things to consider before doing that list? ReyHahn (talk) 16:38, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

FLC Dutch Athlete of the Year

I've nominated Dutch Athlete of the Year as featured list candidate. Feel free to leave comments. – Editør (talk) 15:47, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

This candidate still needs additional support to be listed as featured list. You can help by leaving comments or casting your vote. – Editør (talk) 10:42, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:ALA Best Fiction for Young Adults#Requested move 29 November 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:ALA Best Fiction for Young Adults#Requested move 29 November 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Kiwiz1338 (talk) 18:07, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Theatre World Award#Requested move 5 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Theatre World Award#Requested move 5 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:36, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Total awards/nominations in infobox/lede/TFL-summary should be avoided

Motivated by the IMO spurious assertion on the Mainpage today that "The Philippine television newscast 24 Oras has won thirty-two awards from ninety-three nominations", I've started a discussion at Template talk:Infobox awards list#Totals should be avoided. Comments there are welcome. jnestorius^(talk) 14:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at List of awards and nominations received by Mad Men

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of awards and nominations received by Mad Men#Tables suggestion, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. RunningTiger123 (talk) 15:01, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chidananda S Naik

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chidananda S Naik, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:47, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Hong Kong Film Award#Requested move 22 June 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Hong Kong Film Award#Requested move 22 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky (talk) 08:11, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Featured list removal candidate

I have nominated List of Indian Nobel laureates for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Broc (talk) 12:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)