Talk:Pigasus Award

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Listing Recipients

I would be in favor of treating this subject less like a legitimate award. I am working on an updated draft. I do not necessarily agree with the listing of every "recipient" just for the sake of listing every recipient. I think linking to them would be the better solution and perhaps including a paragraph on the more noted/recent/relevant recipients. -- Krash (Talk) 03:28, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I could not find any link with all of them. I won't add any more winners until something is decided. Bubba73 (talk), 03:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I contend that this, although a real award, is not very notable outside the context of Randi/JREF.[1] An exhaustive list of recipients seems to be borderline cruft. -- Krash (Talk) 03:55, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, you have a good point. But I think a few should be there to get the flavor of it. Bubba73 (talk), 03:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Agree wholly. Perhaps in paragraph form rather than as a list? -- Krash (Talk) 03:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I prefer it in list form rather than paragraph form. Bubba73 (talk), 04:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

However, the current form for the recent years doesn't make it clear for which category the award is given. Bubba73 (talk), 04:25, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't really see the need to list any that don't already have an article and/or need a great deal of explanation to establish context. Good examples of keepers would be Sylvia Browne, What tнe ♯$*! Do ωΣ (k)πow!?, Project Alpha, Manto Tshabala-Msimang, John Edwards, etc. The first 2 under 2004 and #4 under 1979 seem to require too much explaining. Perhaps rather than listing by year, it could be a single list of the most notable mentions. There were several years when Pigasus/Uri didn't exist ('83-'96???). This should be mentioned in the article, but I can't find any information on it. There just seems to be a gap in the history. -- Krash (Talk) 04:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I like the current recipient list format (umm...maybe that's because I made it that way?). But yeah, I guess it should be updated to be all inclusive ('80, '81, '96, '99, etc). I'll take a stab at listing those missing entries. I think we've done a pretty good job on this article considering it's about an award that doesn't really even exist. Quite frankly, I think the article's too long and the subject's not important enough to establish much context. I'd change my view ("not very notable outside the context of Randi/JREF.[2]") if we could find some reliable secondary sources. But I don't know if the subject's notable enough for those to exist. -- Krash (Talk) 19:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Here it is mentioned in TIME. Bubba73 (talk), 19:22, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Good research! -- Krash (Talk) 19:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't notice this was a contentious topic before editing. As you can guess, I do agree with listing all the recipients. Each one is fairly notable, and most have Wikipedia articles already, and if we assume this award is notable, listing notable recipients of the award seems fairly important. GRuban 19:33, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

By all means, keep up the good work! My only critique would be that subsections make the TOC look funny. -- Krash (Talk) 19:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sylvia Browne

The article says "Sylvia Browne, who has the distinction of being the only two-time recipient." I predict that he will be the first three-time winner. Bubba73 (talk), 00:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I think you'll find "he" is a "she " and I didn't need psychic powers to deduce that. Rrose Selavy