Talk:List of poetry awards

[NB while merger is proposed i've redirected the other talk page here so there's only 1 discussion] merge completed

pages are obviously duplications. i propose one becomes redirect (probably Poetry prizes?) OR Poetry prizes becomes a proper article (tho how much is there to say?) & List of poetry awards continues as is. obviously i will collate the differences between pages if there's a merger. also think we shld get rid of the english only specification, that wld be relevant only on the appropriately titled list/article → bsnowball 08:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree that having two lists is duplicative. I think "List of poetry awards" is the better title because it's in keeping with Wikipedia conventions, therefore easier to find. "Poetry awards" is a fine title for an article on the subject if an article ever gets written on the subject, but why not delete it and let someone bring it up who wants to do that article? Incidentally, this information on Wikipedia seems to be the only collection on the Internet of poetry or literary awards extensively cross-linked and linked to author biography articles. When enough awards lists and author biographies are added, Wikipedia could become an extremely valuable research tool for any readers interested in the subject.Noroton 17:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Some other questions about poetry awards lists

I came across the List of poetry awards before I started adding to it and found it was already English-only. By one count there are 750 poetry awards out there in just the English language, and I worry that this list will become unwieldy eventually, something like the way the List of prizes, medals, and awards is unwieldy. Noroton 17:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC) (additional edit a little later)

Here are some questions/proposals I have about the best ways to organize these things:

1. Notability: There are hundreds of awards for $1,000 out there that don't really seem to have any claim to notability at all. With poets sending in fees of $20 or even (I think) $30 per application, the awards might be an excuse for some publications to get submissions or even just raise money. If we have some standard of notability, perhaps it should be that the award is at least $1,000, or perhaps more than $1,000 (I'm sure there are at least 70 American poetry awards with prizes larger than that, we already have at least 35 listed), or national in scope, or somehow prominent in some other way (a Paris Review award, I think, would be worth listing even if it were $1,000 or lower, same with the award associated with Sewanee Review -- these are probably just too prominent to ignore). Some Wikipedia notability standards require that a subject meet at least one criterion of several, so maybe we could do it that way. I certainly don't want to clog up the encyclopedia with numerous awards that readers have to navigate around on lists and category pages, then see them either not updated or, worse, have someone spend time updating them when no one or hardly anyone reads them. So I propose a Wikipedia standard of having articles on awards that meet at least one of the following criteria: 1. At least national in geographic scope; 2. An award of more than $1,000; 3. Some kind of demonstration that the award is considered important among respected authorities on poetry or literature in general; 4. At least four recipients of the awards have gone on to win Pulitzer Prizes for their poetry or two or three other top, national poetry awards in whatever country the poet lives in. (I'm not sure how to go about proposing this standard more formally.) Perhaps since this isn't a problem yet we don't need to discuss it yet, but it might save future conflict and wasted effort.Noroton 17:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

2. Scope: What's the best way to list poetry awards? There aren't many poetry award pages now, but I'm certain there will be in the future. (For one thing, these pages aren't hard to create.) We should think about this early to avoid the work of redirecting links later on. I can easily foresee a couple of hundred poetry awards from around the world having their own Wikipedia articles with lists. How useful is it to have all of them on one page? I really don't know, but I suspect that a category page or a list-of-lists page (a page listing articles of lists of poetry awards by language or nationality) would be more useful, and then have language-based poetry lists. The question really boils down to: Does a reader who wants to find a particular poetry award or is browsing among poetry awards want to look at awards from other languages or is that reader primarily interested in looking only at awards in one language? My assumption is that one language (or nation) per list page is best, all linked together on a list-of-lists page for poetry awards (same with literary awards) or simply a category of poetry-award-list pages. Some (not many) awards, such as the Nobel Prize in Literature, are entirely international in scope and that might be yet another list.Noroton 17:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

3. Organization of individual award lists: For the lists of winners on various literary awards pages, I've been making changes that I think make the lists much easier to use: 1. Putting the lists in reverse chronological order (because I think there's more interest in recent awards); 2. Giving the list sections on the awards pages the uniform title "Winners"; 3. Creating links to the "[year] in literature" pages for each year in the list; 4. Often placing authors names just after the year, then the title of the work (if any). All of these changes have been the most common formats for the lists and by making them more uniform I hope to make it easier for readers to quickly find what they want. Does anyone have an objection to any of this or agree with it?Noroton 17:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

4. Tables: I've seen some tables for lists of winners in poetry-award pages. These tables seem especially useful (that is, easier for readers to find information on) when there are more than three elements to a list of award winers. With three elements or less per line (such as the usual year/author/name of work) the tables don't really help much, but if there are multiple winners, if judges are included or other information is included (occasionally it seems worthwhile to include the name of the publisher, particularly if the award is for work published by small presses), then the tables are much easier to read. I expect to eventually create tables for all lists that have at least four elements per line. Does anyone have an objection or agree with this? Noroton 17:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

5. "[year] in literature" pages: I'm trying to create links from all major awards to the awards section in each "[year] in literature" page and list all the major awards given out each year in that awards section. As those awards sections get larger, I've been using subheadings to categorize them by country. Any objections/support for this? Noroton 17:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I have toconcede that I'm very busy right now, and I can't review the whole situation to a degree that I would be comfortable with.
1. I would just go with your gut. Dont' worry about someone cracking down on the list as too vague-- just use your intuition as to which are notable, using the criteria of fame, monetary reward, historical significance, etc.
2. The purpose of a list is to address the weaknesses of categories. For one thing, categories do not include not-yet-created articles. Secondly, in cases in which why entity Y might be considered in group X is not quite obvious, there is no way to explain this. See List of Dictators. I say if you don't see yourself creating an article for every poetry award, go with the list, and don't be afraid of red links. They encourage article creation. But if you foresee a creation of said articles, I'd just go with Category:Poetry awards.
3. Sounds good.
4. For winners by year, this sounds good. For lists of poetry prizes, it sounds bad. I would just go with bullets as grids are an eyesore.
5. No objections. Good luck, AdamBiswanger1 20:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

thinking aloud more than anything else:

• hadn't occured to me that there's no general interlinked lit prize thing. this is a good point. obviously these prizes can be a goood way into of field one knows very little about.
• size of page, yup, this is true. praps only really major awards in world languages (arabic, spanish etc) aside frm english
• 'importance' more generally, only international & national? ie at least in of whose eligible, then some sort of estimation of the coverage the award gets (ie not just city or state-wide & so forth) the rest cld go in sections of respective national lit awards list or even lists of awards for that country. hopefully these issues can just vaguely sort themselves out, (like 'notablity' doesn't) but yes, page size is the big limiting factor
• layout: i hate this. want to avoid perpetrating horrors like Western Australian Premier's Book Awards (yes, entirely my fault) but how else apart frm seperate list? S.E.A. Write Award is an interesting tho specific idea. on the question of tables i strongly agree w/ Adam about ugliness, but not everyone does. also they needn't be bordered, can distiguish rows w/ (mildish) highlighting
• never been too sure about year lists, but yes in this context they are a good entry point to a potentially intimidating topic
  

seem to have stumbled into more than i expected :) will keep thinking about this → bsnowball 10:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
ps: agree about listing publishers where applicable, very important fr small-press poetry

Looks like you've been doing good work. I'll chip in as time permits. I especially like a focus on broadening awards out beyond the English language awards. I also agree that layouts like Western Australian Premier's Book Awards are difficult. I think this is all heading in the right direction. Sam 21:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

merger completed

(note all the above has been cut & pasted from the talk of Poetry prizes, that now redirects)
yay, no double redirects to fix up! as far as i could tell the only arguable bit was wether it shld include languages other than english, um to avoid working that out i've included them, & changed the lead to reflect that for now: this can be debated now. (yes, this happens to accord with my opinion, but it doesn't prejudge [too much] & anyway i moved them ;) cld someone pls check it all. & i'll look for the redlinks  ⇒ bsnowball  11:24, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Mark prizes that charge a fee

I suggest we implement a convention by which prizes for which you have to pay a fee to be considered should be marked on the Wikipedia page with a $. This is actually common practice for many lists of artistic prizes. For example, the page http://www.composerssite.com/, one of the main vehicles for advertising calls for submissions of music compositions for prizes and music festivals, indicates which ones require paying a fee, and even allows users to search only for calls which do or do not charge one. And there are other lists of prizes and calls for creative work on the internet which do the same. Littlewindow (talk) 23:22, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Since no one has objected to this in the past six months, I'll start adding this information. Littlewindow (talk) 19:37, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

I had not seen the original proposal. I don't like the idea (certainly not in such a US-centric way). Pinkbeast (talk) 19:51, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Anyone is free to add similar information to the contests listed under other countries. Littlewindow (talk) 20:08, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Now that I think of it, I wonder if "prizes" for which you have to pay to be considered ought to be on this page at all. After all, such things are really contests, not prizes, and a contest is something different from a prize. An "award" usually is taken to mean a recognition which the recipient hasn't specifically applied for. Do you have to make an application and pay a fee to be considered for a Nobel Prize? For a Pulitzer? For a Medal of Freedom? For an Oscar? For the Man Booker Prize? For a Costa award? For the Bollingen Prize? These are real awards, not fund-raising schemes. Maybe there should be a separate article for all those application-with-fee "prizes" called "List of poetry contests." Littlewindow (talk) 22:23, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of poetry awards. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120227145007/http://www.johnbutleryeatsseminar.com/wbyeatspoetryprize to http://www.johnbutleryeatsseminar.com/wbyeatspoetryprize

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:40, 1 January 2018 (UTC)