Jump to content

Talk:List of awards and nominations received by Adam Sandler

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Golden Raspberry "awards"

[edit]

We mustn't add the Golden Raspberry "award" to this list article without coverage of the specific award in a reliable secondary source. The "razzies" are intended to mock and degrade the recipient. Under WP:BLP, such content needs to be reliably sourced. That is, we need some kind of reference to it in a newspaper or magazine article, independent of the award administrators. This has been discussed at some length very recently in WP:WikiProject Film. Coretheapple (talk) 15:52, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The Golden Raspberry Awards are considered notable enough to have several independent Wikipedia pages (a main page and ones for each of the major categories that awards are given in - see the template at the bottom of the main page for the awards). Once it has been determined that the awards are notable, then the only question left before including it here is whether or not Sandler actually won that particular award or not. To answer that question no secondary source is needed. The primary source (in this case http://www.razzies.com/) will authoritatively tell us which Razzies he has won. Secondary sources are only needed to establish notability or in cases where self-promotion might be a concern (like using http://www.adamsandler.com/ to source a claim that he is the greatest actor of his generation, for example). You might not like the inclusion of Razzies, but the Razzies website will tell us which ones he has won and so putting them on this list raises no BLP issues. But if you really insist on secondary sources, there are tons of them. The Razzies are reported on every year by every major news outlet. Just googling "adam sandler razzie" gives results showing articles in Variety, USA Today, Forbes, The Hollywood Reporter, CBC, ABC, The Guardian, BBC, The National Post (Canada), MTV, SFGate, The Globe and Mail, Reuters, The Washington Post, and many many many more. So even with an unreasonably high demand of sourcing, a ton of articles can be found in reliable sources reporting these awards. 99.192.93.187 (talk) 22:44, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So put some of those "ton of articles" in this one. If the Razzie has been written about, it can go in. But no, the Razzie website, boasting of the "awards" it gave this lousy actor, which it obviously holds in low esteem - no, that won't just do, not in a biography of a living person or a dead one, for that matter. Under our policy, there are standards for including derogatory negative information about a living person, and just don't trash someone willy-nilly. Coretheapple (talk) 13:31, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLP applies to all Wikipedia pages, not just articles about the person in question. If it is problematic to say something about Sandler for BLP reasons it is equally a problem if that statement appears of the Adam Sandler page, this list of awards page, or any other page on Wikipedia. So how, then, do you explain the existence of the page Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Actor? That page not only lists Sandler's multiple awards for worst actor, but it lists dozens of other actors who were either winners or nominees. None of those claims on that page provide any source for the nomination or win other than the official Razzie website. The same problem, if there were one, would also apply to the pages Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Actress, Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Supporting Actor, Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Supporting Actress, Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Director, Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Screenplay, and several other Razzie pages. The simple fact is that there is no BLP issue here at all. The Razzies are notable enough to have multiple Wikipedia pages and the claims that these people were the "worst" at something are appropriately attributed to the awards that made the claim. Saying Sandler was given an award for "worst actor" and citing only the organization that gave it to him is exactly the same thing as quoting a review of a film that says "Sandler gives a terrible performance" and only citing the reviewer who said it. The primary source is enough. There is no BLP issue here. 99.192.77.216 (talk) 14:02, 25 June 2014 (UTC) (=99.192.93.187)[reply]
Yes, there are definitely serious problems with the Golden Raspberry Awards, as they are intended to degrade and humiliate performers, and thus inherently pose a BLP problem, and it is a problem in a number of articles, and are being addressed there. But we are talking about this article. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid excuse. Coretheapple (talk) 14:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense. citing "otherstuff" does not explain how many articles can exist for many years edited by many people without BLP being a problem. This is a lot more than just "otherstuff". It is standard practice, just like quoting negative reviews is. Also, on Wikipedia Talk:FILM, where you have started sections, no one there has said that these pages are BLP problems. You are the only one who thinks so. if the existence of those pages is not a BLP issue, then noting the same information with the same sourcing on this page is not a BLP issue. I would suggest starting a specific discussion either on WT:FILM or on the BLP talk page to ask if the Razzie pages are BLP problems and the awards being given to people named on those pages need any further independent citations. You might want to start such a discussion. I will be offline now until tomorrow, so I might start the discussions then. But I bet if you ask if those Razzie pages are BLP problems the overwhelming majority of editors will say they are not. 99.192.77.216 (talk) 15:54, 25 June 2014 (UTC) (=99.192.93.187)[reply]
It's already been discussed at Wikiproject Film, because a user was spamming articles like this with "Razzies," and the consensus is that it requires independent sourcing. I think it's questionable whether they belong in award lists at all, with or without sourcing, as they are simply not awards but "digs." While we don't want puffery in articles, and I spend a good percentage of my time fighting that, we can't just lard articles with crap like this when the subject is a BLP and a self-appointed group decides that it doesn't like a particular actor. There has to be some news coverage, at a minimum. Yes, we do include negative reviewers, but this is not a review, there is no text, just a "razz" and we need more than that in terms of sourcing to include in someone's bio. Coretheapple (talk) 15:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have read the discussion at WT:FILM and other editors say nothing about BLP being a concern and some editors support the inclusion of Razzies on pages. So to specifically address the BLP question, I have just started a section on WT:BLP to discuss whether or not there is a BLP issue. 99.192.79.171 (talk) 17:21, 26 June 2014 (UTC) (=99.192.93.187)[reply]

Zero sources cited on "awards" pages about BLPs

[edit]
  1. List of awards and nominations received by Susan Sarandon
  2. List of awards and nominations received by Nicolas Cage
  3. List of awards and nominations received by Adam Sandler
  • "Awards" pages about WP:BLPs, each had zero sources, none cited, whatsoever.
  • I've removed the wholly unsourced info about WP:BLPs.
  • Please don't add back unsourced info unless properly cited to sources that conform to site policy, including WP:BLP, WP:RS, and WP:V.

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 20:32, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of awards and nominations received by Adam Sandler. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:44, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Razzies

[edit]

I've readded the razzies, the "argument" presented up page is entirely spurious, there is no blp issue with them, they're mentioned as standard on wiki. Reminder that users with conflict of interest shouldn't edit articles. 92.10.157.34 (talk) 09:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on List of awards and nominations received by Adam Sandler. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 10:14, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of awards and nominations received by Adam Sandler. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 17:18, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Adam_Sandler&oldid=1203622706"