Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of actors who have won an Academy Award, a BAFTA Award, a Golden Globe, a SAG, and a Critic's Choice Award for a single performance


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   no consensus, although I have just moved the article to a slightly shorter title which goes over two, rather than three, lines. There is a reasonable argument presented on both sides. The delete side has argued that the inclusion criteria are arbitrary, and made on the spur of the moment, although this has been rebutted by those pointing out that these five (not six) awards are among the most prestigious and that winning multiple awards like this is an unusual achievement which ought to be documented. I am adding the source found by Jaxsonjo which has lent support to the contention that these awards are indeed among the most prestigious. I am still unsure about whether this ought to be enough, but I cannot see a consensus to delete here. Sjakkalle (Check!)  15:19, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

List of actors who have won an Academy Award, a BAFTA Award, a Golden Globe, a SAG, and a Critic's Choice Award for a single performance

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article screams of list cruft. I know some people love to take note of this type of statistic, but let's face it, this is trivial information. There is no need for a list like this on Wikipedia. Also, the title is waaaaaaaaay too long. Feed back  ☎ 16:33, 25 February 2011 (UTC)  Feed  back  ☎ 16:33, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see a deletion argument here beyond WP:IDONTLIKEIT (seriously, you've just combined two or three of the examples given there with no further substance). That said, can anyone explain why this particular combination of awards is significant?  The significance of EGOT is pretty clear, but this choice of awards seems arbitrary.  postdlf (talk) 18:13, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * How is it a case of "I don't like it"? I didn't say I hate the list or anyone on it, I just said I don't think it warrants a place on Wikipedia. The criteria to make this list is not significant historically nor culturally. This list has no basis for notability. Feed  back  ☎ 20:04, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * "cruft" and "trivia" are given as examples of insufficient deletion arguments at WP:IDONTLIKEIT; "no need for a list like this on Wikipedia" isn't really all that different from "I'm so ashamed this article is on Wikipedia", another example. What they have in common is that they are all unelaborated opinions that don't address the specific content of the article, they only communicate that you want it deleted.  Your reply to me above goes a lot further towards explaining your deletion rationale, however.  postdlf (talk) 23:38, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:34, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:34, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep I agree that the title is waaaaaaaaay too long-- it's probably a byproduct of titles that get the "whuzzatmean?" objection, where if the title is "List of actors who have won multiple simultaneous awards", there's a lot of "what awards?" "how much is multiple?" "is it simultaneous if they got awarded at different times?" "how do you define actors?" etc. I don't think it's trivial-- it's a rare actor or actress who gets the award from the voters in their colleagues at American and British Academies and the Screen Actors Guild and the critics at home and abroad.  I think this probably would work better as a list of persons who won the most major awards for a particular film performance, and include things like the People's Choice Award.  Then, all we have to contend with is "why 8?" "why 7?" "why 6?" etc. Mandsford 20:12, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I like that in principle, but I don't see a way to draw a reasonable line between "major" and nonmajor awards, without including all notable awards. Daniel Day-Lewis, for example, is on this list for his role in There Will Be Blood, but if you look at his filmography in his article, you'll see that he won far more than these five awards for it; I count 26 awards that have their own articles.  And even if we do include all notable awards, then the total award count is arbitrary and just a function of Wikipedia notability guidelines rather than a concrete fact of how many awards someone has won.  So I'm doubting whether we can compose such a list meaningfully unless we can find sources that themselves make such award result comparisons or counts.  postdlf (talk) 00:17, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Arbitrary combination of selection criteria. Why not add "Left handed?" Edison (talk) 20:57, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep We have a long tradition of lists of Full Ginsbergs appearances and for awards. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:17, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Arbitrary selection criteria. Full Ginsburg is not a criteria created by a Wikipedia editor. How about List of people who were Christians, became atheists then won Oscars or List of countries larger than Spain? If the selection criteria were meaningful, there would be reliable sources discussing the topic. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:14, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Silly trivia. Regent of the Seatopians (talk) 13:13, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep A list of achieving the six major cinema awards for the same performance. Jaxsonjo (talk) 07:14, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - We know what the article is intended to be. As outlined above, though, many of us feel the article does not meet our guidelines for inclusion. Please explain which guideline(s) you feel justifies your !vote. - SummerPhD (talk) 16:39, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * If we had a source(s) expressly supporting the view these are "the six major cinema awards," it would go a long way towards justifying this list. postdlf (talk) 16:46, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6244543.stm might well be such a list Jaxsonjo (talk) 00:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.