Talk:Edna Staebler Award

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Edna Staebler Award article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Awards Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Awards, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of awards and prizes on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AwardsWikipedia:WikiProject AwardsTemplate:WikiProject Awardsawards articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Canada Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Token or prize[edit]

About the Award (official)

quote: The Edna Staebler Award for Creative Non-Fiction is awarded annually and valued at $10,000.

That is poorly said if the award is simply a C$10,000 cash prize. It may be a token such as a diamond- or corundum-studded cup with assessed value $10,000.

For now the {{infobox award}} specifies "Reward $10,000" but we say nothing in prose.

--P64 (talk) 21:56, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing[edit]

Just a reminder that the purpose of referencing is not only to offer technical verification of facts, but also to demonstrate that the topic passes WP:GNG by virtue of being a topic that third-party sources cover and analyze as significant independently of the award's own publicity efforts. Which means the article cannot be sourced to Wilfrid Laurier University's own self-published primary source press releases about the award, and must be to media reportage that treats the award as news and/or books that analyze the award's historical and cultural significance. The overwhelming majority of the sourcing here (27 out of 38 footnotes) is primary, however — so the sourcing needs to be significantly improved, because the award's eligibility to even have an article at all is contingent upon the amount of attention it does or doesn't get from third party media of record, and not on its own self-published primary source verification that it exists. Bearcat (talk) 16:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]