Talk:Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games 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.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Jackpot World (1 participant)
Bejeweled Stars (5 participants)
Melee (game terminology) (5 participants)
Godzilla: Monster of Monsters (4 participants; relisted)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (4 participants; relisted)
Crazy Bus (13 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Fair use rationale for Image:Nav aias-logo.jpg

Image:Nav aias-logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who's this Langdell person that gets mentioned in the third paragraph? No previous references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.21.163.156 (talk) 02:12, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Need to standardize on table or list

Currently there is a mixture of tables and lists which don't have a good appearance and could be improved nby standardizing on one or the other. RJFJR (talk) 17:24, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposing a complicated Merge/Split

I would like to consider the following two major steps:

Splitting the DICE awards to its own article D.I.C.E. Awards currently a redirect to here.
Merging D.I.C.E. Summit fully into this article.

The Awards get attention, but the Summit far less (beyond the talks that are given, and when you come to how much E3 gets). The stuff between AIAS & the summit and any thing else AIAS does outside of the Awards will still be short. --MASEM (t) 01:13, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would it make more sense to split just the awards list to its own article and keep the content about the awards ceremony here, since it's a major part of the topic? Might be the same in effect, apart from the article title. Summit merge sounds good.

czar 17:43, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think we'd want to mention AIAS does the awards, but the format of the awards should at least also be on the awards page if split out. --MASEM (t) 18:11, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Masem: I know I'm commenting here kind of late, but I support this proposal. If we're going to list all of the individual awards they've given, that should be in a separate article.

While we're at it, I'd like some opinions on how to handle the sourcing for individual awards. In the lists of individual Academy Awards (e.g. Academy Award for Best Picture), the lists are mostly unsourced, but all of the D.I.C.E. Awards also could potentially be cited to the AIAS website. I suspect that's the only source available for a lot of the individual awards. Would it be better to cite that for most of them, or to handle the D.I.C.E. award lists the same way as the Academy Award lists? --Captain Occam (talk) 20:36, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would not separate out each award to its own article. The awards are notable, but not that notable. Maybe the GOTY one, but that's it. --Masem (t) 20:58, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I wasn't intending to suggest that we have a separate article for each award. When I asked whether we should handle the D.I.C.E. Awards in the same way as the Academy Awards, I was just referring to the fact that in the articles on individual Academy Awards, which movie won the award in a particular year is treated as information that doesn't require a source. In this article, some of the individual awards have sources and some of them don't, but I think it would be better to be consistent about whether they need sources or not. --Captain Occam (talk) 01:31, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we need each year, yet. In constrast to, say, The Game Awards 2017 which is a whole ceremony, things like DICE and GDC, while broadcasted, are not necessarily targetting an audience, so the awards just happen. It would be nice to find a way to list nominees in addition to wins that we'd easily be able to do on the per-year pages, I can't see that easily happening here. --Masem (t) 02:47, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really just trying to discuss sourcing here, not any of the other issues you're bringing up.

Anyway, I think you can go ahead with your proposed split and merge. I approve of your suggestion about that, and it doesn't look like anyone else is going to offer an opinion. --Captain Occam (talk) 03:14, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]