Wikipedia:Awards and accolades

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.

Awards in articles must be supportable by reliable independent secondary sources to establish their significance.
Awards with their own article (e.g. Academy Award for Best Actor) are presumptively appropriate for inclusion, both for winners and often for nominees.
Awards where the award series has its own article (e.g. 2019 iHeartRadio Music Awards) are presumptively appropriate, for winners and, if there is consensus on Talk or through a WikiProject, for nominees.
Award series which have articles but the individual award or annual ceremony does not, may be suitable for inclusion if mentioned in reliable independent secondary sources.
Listicles are not awards.
Listicles based on subjective attributes (e.g. attractiveness) are unencyclopaedic.

The guiding policy here is: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.

Criteria

Awards / accolades

The base criterion for including an award or accolade in an article or standalone list is:

There is an article on the specific award (e.g. Academy Award for Best Actor)

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.

Lists

The base criterion for mentioning inclusion in a published list is:

There is an article on the specific list (e.g. Forbes 400) or set of lists (e.g. Forbes 30 Under 30)

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.

Sourcing

The absolute minimum standard for inclusion of any award or accolade in an article or list is:

The award or accolade must have been reported in a reliable source independent of the recipient or promoters of the award.

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.

Awards to avoid

The following should be avoided:

Awards or lists based on subjective assessment of attractiveness are generally unencyclopaedic. "Best bikini body" or "hottest beard" contain no judgment of objective merit and are mainly there to garner clicks or sell magazines.
Awards of a promotional nature. Awards should not be included when the award-grantor has a pattern of granting awards with a conflict of interest, such as an organization granting awards to itself or to its own products or its business partners.
Awards or organizations or processes that do not present themselves in a respectable or responsible manner, or which are generally viewed as not serious or respectable. This may be indicated by absurd or frivolous award-categories, silly award names, a silly or unreliable process for selecting nominees and winners, or a pattern of nominees/winners that clearly lack credibility. A few spoof awards (e.g. the Razzies) are notable and commented on by third-party sources, but most are not.

Awards in the lead

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.