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 (2nd nomination)


 * 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 delete. I'm really tempted to not close this, so I can !vote Merge with List of articles with absurdly long titles, but duty calls. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:09, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

List of actors who won the Academy, BAFTA, Critics’ Choice, Golden Globe, and SAG Award for a single performance in film

 * – ( View AfD View log  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 (2nd nomination)

This is a meta-list article synthesizing other lists, but there's no indication that these lists (film awards for acting) should be combined at all. Unlike, say, EGOT, this meta-list has been given no basis off wikipedia. In fact, the reason it wasn't deleted last time (besides no consensus) was that a source gave it such a basis — but it didn't. This article is asserting that the five most prestigious acting awards are the Academy, Golden Globe, BAFTA, SAG, and Critics' Choice Awards. The source does not support this assertion. It does mentions seven awards— Academy, Golden Globe, BAFTA, Guild Awards, the National Board of Review award, Independent Spirit and assorted "Critics Awards". Guild Awards when applied to acting obviously means the SAG, and you can reasonably take out independent spirit by clarifying it's non-independent film. But conveniently ignoring the NBR is unjustified, in fact the source gives far more weight to the NBR than it does to the Critics Choice.

It mentioned the latter as one of several critics' awards— "The key groups in the US include the National Society of Film Critics, made up of 55 writers across the country, the LA Film Critics Association and the New York Film Critics Circle. The London Film Critics' Circle, comprising more than 80 members, issues awards recognizing British and international film talent. In recent years, the Broadcast Film Critics Association has aspired to usurp the status of the Golden Globes, with a televised ceremony of the unashamedly populist Critics' Choice Awards." If you interpret this text literally then the key groups in the US include NSFC, LAFC, and NYFCC. Then it mentions London as a key Critics' group out of the US. But it reserves a different clause for the Critics' Choice—separating it from other critics awards by noting its "unashamed populism" (critics awards are noted for not being populist and for being impartial to commercialism unlike academy-style awards) and saying it wants to usurp the golden globes. A more lenient interpretation is that all the groups are key Critics' groups— but therefore by the source there's no reason to just include the Critics' Choice and not all the groups it mentioned.

Now I didn't want to delete this article, so I changed it to conform to the source it used— I included the NBR and all the Critics' Awards it mentioned, and noted that those six awards were the more prestigious awards for contemporary English non-independent cinema, so as to not generalize unfairly. This change (and here's the most recent version of the page in the same vein by ) was admittedly awkward but at least it was based on substance.

My edits got reverted. The reasons for reverting my edit was basically that, if I may quote comments on the talk page, it "overcomplicated [the page] and made [the page] too exclusive" and that "NBR isn't a significant award". That's all good and well, but we can't have a preconceived list of performances in our minds, pick criteria around our mind-list, and then say lists that happen to omit performances on our mind-list are "too exclusive". I understand the article's purpose- to note the most acclaimed performances in contemporary cinema with objective criteria, but the criteria isn't objective if it's selected subjectively. This feels like a cruft list, not to mention SYNTH. Time to ping those involved in the original deletion discussion. . I'll put in a request for comment on this on related wikiprojects as recommended. --Monochrome _ Monitor  08:56, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

I did in fact find some sources that mention specific actors/actresses as having won these five specific awards – quite possibly inspired by the existence of this article; namely this source and this source. But I'm not very convinced by these sources, and any treatment of these actors as a group is minimal. (By contrast, this source clearly treats actors who have won an Oscar, a Golden Globe and a Screen Actors Guild Award for the same performance as a group.) List of directors who won the Academy, BAFTA, DGA, Golden Globe, and Critic's Choice Award for a single film, the twin of this article, should also be deleted. Sideways713 (talk) 22:59, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete As the nominator demonstrates, the grouping (and in particular, the selection of the Critics' Choice award over all other critics' awards) is subjective and arbitrary. Here's a source that lists the "three most prestigious critics groups" in this context and doesn't mention the Critics' Choice award at all.


 * There's a "cousin" of this page about television List of actors who won the Critics’ Choice, Golden Globe, Primetime Emmy, SAG, and TCA Award for a single performance in television. Anyway I also thought that New York Film Critics Circle and LA and National Society were more prestigious critics' awards, as your source says. --Monochrome _ Monitor  23:22, 28 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I get what this article is trying to do, but it would better just to have an article "list of film performances considered the best", which unlike this article would apply to each mention contemporaneously without being biased by selecting contemporary film awards.--Monochrome _ Monitor  23:27, 28 November 2015 (UTC)


 * That's another thing I'm concerned about, I don't want wikipedia to create "facts on the ground". None of your sources mentioning those awards grouped together precede the article. --Monochrome _ Monitor  23:31, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. sst✈(discuss) 05:10, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:22, 29 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - This set of awards seems arbitrary. The EGOT is a notable concept.  I don't understand the origin of this grouping of awards. Chunky Rice (talk) 17:44, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and above editors. This list is original research, and doesn't meet WP:NOTESAL. FuriouslySerene (talk) 14:49, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - This set of awards seems arbitrary. There is no general linkage of these 'off-wiki', which makes this OR and a bit pointless. Pincrete (talk) 09:50, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - super duper arbitrary 166.137.96.95 (talk) 18:02, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * To clarify, if this gets deleted (as Sideways pointed out) then so should List of directors who won the Academy, BAFTA, DGA, Golden Globe, and Critic's Choice Award for a single film and possibly this List of actors who won the Critics’ Choice, Golden Globe, Primetime Emmy, SAG, and TCA Award for a single performance in television (though the latter might need a new thread, but it's similarly arbitrary). --Monochrome _ Monitor  16:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom - EGOT is only combo of notable awards thus far —Мандичка YO 😜 16:39, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Actors and directors get nominated in multiple award shows all the time, it's nothing new or worth noting. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 23:41, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with what all of you say, especially Blaze The Movie Fan post. Matt294069 is coming 19:50, 5 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nom and all above  Jay  Jay What did I do? 22:50, 5 December 2015 (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.