Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Awards and prizes
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Awards and prizes page.|
|Archives: 1, 2|
|WikiProject Awards and prizes||(Rated Project-class)|
|: Through 2012 there are 82 items in the Archive.|
- 1 Singular and plural Award(s)
- 2 Which of those awards make a person notable?
- 3 List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!
- 4 Archived some threads
- 5 List peer review for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!
- 6 1st Grande Prêmio Cinema Brasil peer review
- 7 Nomination for deletion of Template:Honor-stub
Current discussion of moving the Academy Award article (Suggested move) alerts me to the WP:SINGULAR admonition to use the singular in article titles. Consider Nobel Prize and National Book Award which are about annual sets of awards.
Perhaps these articles on British literary awards should have singular names
- Costa Book Awards (previously Whitbread)
- Specsavers National Book Awards (previously Galaxy); Category:British Book Awards
- Hampshire Book Awards
- I don't know if the specific preferred usage of any one of those awards would weigh against a singular form, but I have no objections to changing all of the plural article titles to singular. --Vojen (talk) 08:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
See Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(people)#The_person_has_received_a_well-known_and_significant_award_or_honor.2C_or_has_been_nominated_for_one_several_times.. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:53, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- That's a good question. The importance of an award will sometimes vary over time as will the importance of its recipients, and oftentimes an award only becomes notable because it successfully identifies notable individuals before their notability is generally recognized. Notability is probably going to come down to a case by case basis for most people, but if you're looking for a general rule, you can check the Awards and Prizes WikiProject ranking for importance. Unfortunately this project is not as active as some of the other projects, so a lot of awards are laking importance ranks, and many that are ranked haven't been fully veted. However, as a general guideline I'd say winning or even being listed as a finalist for an award that has been ranked for Top Importance would probably make an individual notable per se. Winners of an award ranked for High Importance would also be per se notable, but I don't know that I would extend that distinction to award finalists. Of course many of the other finalists would be notable anyway, but if we're talking about a per se rule, this is where I would draw the line. Many of the Mid Importance rank awards are really just individual iterations of higher ranked awards (e.g. the article for the 26th Annual Grammy Awards is given a mid-importance rank, but the article for the Grammy Award itself is given a high-importance rank), so many of the winners of these awards will still be notable as winners of higher ranked awards. This is also true of many of the sports awards, like the Cy Young Award or the Heisman Trophy, both of which are mid-importance for awards purposes, but are high-importance in their respective fields. However, other awards look less significant, such as the J. Tuzo Wilson Medal. It has some notable recipients, but most are not. So I would say no per se rule on notability for mid-importance awards, just high and top. If anyone else has an opinion, please feel free to add your input.Vojen (talk) 07:45, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
I've recently created the page List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!.
Additional help with research, secondary source suggestions, and quality improvement ideas would be appreciated, at Talk:List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!.
Thank you for your time,
- I replaced the broad archive banner (a slim version remains, far above) with the more visible archive box that displays beside the Contents table. And I annotated the box. --P64 (talk) 19:29, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
List peer review for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!
I've started a list peer review for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!, feedback to further along the quality improvement process would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1. — Cirt (talk) 19:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
1st Grande Prêmio Cinema Brasil peer review
I've just created and put the 1st Grande Prêmio Cinema Brasil article up for Peer Review with the intention of nominating it as a Featured List Candidate. I'd appreciate any and all feedback. The review is at Wikipedia:Peer review/1st Grande Prêmio Cinema Brasil/archive1. Thanks, Gabriel Yuji (talk) 04:18, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Template:Honor-stub has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 05:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)