 | The following is a draft working towards a proposal for adoption as a Wikipedia policy, guideline, or process. The proposal must not be taken to represent consensus, but is still in development and under discussion, and has not yet reached the process of gathering consensus for adoption. Thus references or links to this page should not describe it as policy, guideline, nor yet even as a proposal. |
 | This page in a nutshell: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Articles should include only notable awards and accolades supported by reliable independent sources. |
This page describes the guidance for including awards and accolades on Wikipedia, either within other articles or as standalone lists along the lines of List of awards and accolades received by X
Awards and accolades establish the critical reception of an article subject, but many awards are designed to promote something rather than recognise it - this is particularly true of trade awards. Some editors also treat listicles as awards or accolades. Some list articles in press are notable, but most are not.
The guiding policy here is: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.
The base criterion for including an award or accolade in an article or standalone list is:
We should not, as a matter of course, include list items unless they are demonstrably notable, with notability generally interpreted as having, or obviously qualifying for, a standalone article. Most standalone lists are maintained according to this principle. Notable groups and publications can still hand out non-notable awards. The Daily Planet may be a notable publication, and Superman a notable subject, but the Daily Planet award for best superhero is not a notable award and would not qualify for inclusion in either article. Most industry awards exist as an excuse for a night out on expenses and have zero impact outside of the industry.
The base criterion for mentioning inclusion in a published list is:
Listicles are reliable seasonal space-fillers for the end of year period when staff are on leave and news is slow, but they mean little. A tiny handful (the Forbes 400, for example) are genuinely notable. Most - the vast majority - are not. The Daily Planet is notable, Superman is notable, but the annual Daily Planet top 100 superheroes (with, of course, Superman at #1) is not. This would also apply to inclusion in books like the 1001 Before You Die series.
The absolute minimum standard for inclusion of any award or accolade in an article or list is:
All content on Wikipedia must be drawn from reliable independent sources. For inclusion in any article, an item must be supported by a reliable source that is intellectually independent. The Daily Planet is notable, Superman is notable but the Daily Planet award for best superhero given to Superman and supported only by the story in the Daily Planet, is not. Coverage must also be more than a mere press release, or churnalism.
The following should be avoided:
In order to qualify for inclusion in the lead paragraph, the award or accolade must be of sufficient significance that it contributes to the notability of the subject, or would normally be mentioned in even a short biography. The Academy Awards are the canonical example: "Oscar-winning actor" is a common term of art. Some WikiProjects may consider that induction into certain curated halls of fame also qualifies, when this is covered by third-party sources.