Talk:World Fantasy Award

Lovecraft
The controversy section is wildly biased. To assert that Lovecraft only showed racism in "some of his earlier works" is factually inaccurate. As is saying it was a "minor aspect of his personality." Further, to add quotations to the word controversy in the second paragraph here: "Lovecraft and Weird Fiction scholar S. T. Joshi has addressed this 'controversy' " seems to be an effort to discredit and marginalize the critique of him being the face of the award. Once more Wikipeadia is proving to be a vehicle for apologist of white supremacy and fraught with revisionist history.Pearl2525 (talk) 19:32, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

(Comic books)
Please see http://www.worldfantasy.org/awards/judges.html for the statement about comic book eligibility. —Sharon Sbarsky 15:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The rumour is untrue huh? They let the intro in the fourth Sandman book lie I suppose, I wonder how the editor missed that when it was the central point of the intro? Oh I get it, they didn't make comics uneligible, they just shoved them down into some sub-catagory to collect dust and general lack of interest. Is this the World Fantasy Written Word Awards? No it isn't.
 * And the problem is, THEY DID CHANGE THE RULES. This can be clearly seen on thier own site. They say "Comics are eligible in the Special Award Professional category. We never made a change in the rules.", and yet for all eyes to see... http://www.worldfantasy.org/awards/1991.html... Gee,
 * Short Fiction
 * winner Neil Gaiman & Charles Vess, "A Midsummer Night's Dream"
 * Short Fiction is NOT the same catagory as Special Award Professional Catagory.
 * Which ones the lie? Which ones the truth?
 * —Zephos 2:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * What, you expected the truth when they made such a fiasco out of it? Frankly it just upsets me that wiki gets all upset about the fact they DID change the rules, and decides to remove the facts.
 * —Turkish Proverb 22:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Special Awards
This article says nothing about the four Special Awards, only names them and links our four WP:LISTs. In this respect it is a WP:STUB.

The four list prefaces say almost nothing and do not clearly distinguish them. Here they are in full! --except that there is a second "Professional" paragraph about comics (see above).
 * World Fantasy Convention Award: This special World Fantasy Award is given for peerless contributions to the fantasy genre, and presented (though not every year) at the annual World Fantasy Convention. Past winners have included authors, artists, and publishers.
 * World Fantasy Award for Life Achievement: This World Fantasy Award is presented to individuals for their outstanding service to the fantasy field, and decided by a panel of judges at the World Fantasy Convention.
 * World Fantasy Special Award: Professional: This World Fantasy Award is presented to individuals for their outstanding professional work in the fantasy field, and voted by a panel of judges at the World Fantasy Convention.
 * World Fantasy Special Award: Non-Professional: This World Fantasy Award is presented to individuals for outstanding non-professional work in the fantasy field, and voted by a panel of judges at the World Fantasy Convention.

This article needs to cover the Special Awards generally and provide enough information to distinguish them from each other. Each list prefaces should cover its featured award in context of the entire WFA program --as well as local details such as the comics controversy.

--P64 (talk) 15:36, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Disputed paragraph re Lovecraft
has been today repeatedly trying to insert a paragraph of Vox Day's opinions on the Lovecraft issue. Vox Day is nether an expert on Lovecraft (unlike Joshi) nor a spokesman for the awards, nor was his opinion repeated in a major newspaper; he is just a writer with a blog, among many many other writers and fans who have blogged their opinions on both sides of this issue. As such, my position is that we should not bother to give his opinion any special prominence on this issue. (It doesn't help that Day is better known as a white supremacist than as an author, but that's secondary.) On the other hand, if someone feels that our page should become a quote farm for all published authors who have said something on the subject on their personal blogs, I'd be interested in seeing the justification for that. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:41, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Sandman in lead
201.252.204.192: you keep copying the paragraph in "Controversies" up to the lead, citations and all. Why? The lead is meant to be a summary of the rest of the article, so it wouldn't be appropriate to have the paragraph duplicated there, not to mention that a 25-year-old minor incident would be way over represented in the lead by a whole paragraph. The whole rest of the controversy section gets a single sentence, for example. -- Pres N  17:46, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

New Award Design Announced
According to a press release out today, the board had chosen a new award design sculpted by Vincent Villafranca: a tree silhouetted against a golden moon. As a relative wiki newbie, I'm not sure if it's appropriate yet to change the main image. Also, I assume there will be articles written about the new design by tomorrow. User:Benji2012 (talk) 4-13-17
 * Oh, thanks for mentioning it! Will update the page tonight or tomorrow. -- Pres N  19:15, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Took a bit longer, but done. -- Pres N  20:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC)