Talk:Caldecott Medal

message: Hey, I'm not very good at wikipedia yet, but I was wondering why the Newbery and Caldecott prizes are in a different order. :) Could someone please fix it? Kimuchi 09:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure I understand your question.... What page are you referring to? --Knulclunk 18:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh! I see. One is chronological, the other reverse chronological.  It seems someone decided to reverse it at Newbery first.  We should do a quick poll here. --Knulclunk 18:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry everyone for not reading the talk page first, but, I converted the bulleted list into a table, and, while doing so, made it (reverse, I guess?) chronological (i.e. 2007, 2006, 2005, etc.). I'm not that great with WP code, but I know it's possible to add a "sort" feature to the table (see the table here). --Rockymountains 00:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A sortable table would be fine, with reverse chronological as the default. I think then we would want to be able to sort by author's last names.--Knulclunk 01:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done! All I had to change was in the class declarer (sp?) from "wikitable" to "sortable wikitable." Coding just doesn't get any easier :P. Nevertheless, I'm not sure it would be possible to sort by last names; I don't think MediaWiki is powerful enough to recognize that sort of stuff --Rockymountains 21:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Newbery and Caldecott

message: Isn't the Caldecott Medal awarded to the author and to the illustrator if applicable that particular year? For example, 1988: Owl Moon, illustrated by John Schoenherr; text: Jane Yolen. Maybe we need a column for illustrators as well as authors. 
: Actually it is an award for illustrations, we need to make sure that point is made clear. - Epousesquecido (talk) 22:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're right that the "Author" column heading makes no sense. I think the names listed all correspond to the book's illustrator, and thus the award recipient, but in many cases that person isn't also the author of the book. I'm going to go ahead and change the heading to "Illustrator"; I'm fairly indifferent on whether an Author column should be added. Perhaps simply a column with the heading "Illustrator also author?" or something like that, with Y's or asterisks in the rows where this is true. Users can always click on the book title to find out the author of the book. Propaniac (talk) 16:53, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, now the columns make more sense. - Epousesquecido (talk) 16:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Column heading "Illustrators"

message: But, shouldn't the list be sortable by LAST name?  We don't need to change it, just discuss.--Knulclunk (talk) 21:02, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is important to keep it in chronological order, but it would be nice to be able to sort by last name. - Epousesquecido (talk) 21:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that the default setting should remain chronological, but if we can sort by author it makes more sense to sort by last name than first name, especially if (like me) you want to print out this list and take it to the library.  All these books are shelved by author.  It seems to me that there are two ways to make this possible (1) make a separate column for first name and last name or (2) retype the names last name first (i.e. Krommes, Beth).  The first seems like a lot more work.  I think I like the second method best. -ErinHowarth (talk) 06:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  They have a table like this over at NHL Foundation Player Award.  The names of the players appear first name first, but they sort last name first.  they appear to achieve that by typing the names in a template like this   which appears like this:  .  What do you think? -ErinHowarth (talk) 07:31, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I added the template sortname to all the illustrators.  The table will now sort by last name.  There is a way to do something similar for the titles.  Titles which start with a,an, or the should sort by the next word.  I'm going to work on that next. -ErinHowarth (talk) 07:33, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I added the template sort to the titles which begin with the or a.  It was a lot easier than I thought it would be.  There are very clever people designing templates here at Wikipedia.  The title column now sorts properly. -ErinHowarth (talk) 07:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

text: VIAF says Chan, Plato and confirms our biographies so we need to fix four names, some more than once. --P64 (talk) 02:11, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  so Chan, d'Aulaire, de Angeli, sort to C and D; Wiese consistently sorts before Wiesner. --P64 (talk) 21:16, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Sortable columns

message: I propose moving Caldecot Honor page to here, primarily to make this page more parallel with the Newbery page but also because I think that has become the general standard on most award pages. -ErinHowarth (talk) 07:51, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 12:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Disagree. The Caldecott Honor page is a big mess of red links. The Caldecott Medal page is concise and useful.  There is no harm in keeping them apart. They link to each other clearly. --Knulclunk (talk) 05:30, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Honor page is no longer "a big mess of red links."  I further prpose that this page will be more useful if all the titles are together.  Do you still oppose the merger? --ErinHowarth (talk) 06:28, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Weak disagree, based primarily on the potential size of the combined article, but also because I feel like the Honor and Medal are separate awards (although obviously related) and the Honor shouldn't be treated as a subtopic of the Medal article. I suspect that when you refer to "the general standard on most award pages" you're talking about stuff like the Academy Awards that list all the awards together (if there are other examples more similar to the Caldecott/Newbery construct, please share them), but I don't think there's an official title that refers to all the Caldecott awards lumped together, that the combined article could adopt as its title. Propaniac (talk) 16:30, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, I was thinking of the Academy Awards where they list the nominees under the winner. --ErinHowarth (talk) 17:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Support the Merge This works for the Newbery Medal and the Coretta Scott King Award, why not with the Caldecott? Einbierbitte (talk) 22:45, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: I see this was discussed about a year ago.  I still think that the merger makes sense as it would better parallel the Newbery Medal and with the sortable table the page would not be unwieldy. Barkeep49 (talk) 20:08, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Support Since the ALA lists both Winners and Honor titles for both Medals together  (see Caldecott Medal & Honor Books, 1938-Present and Newbery Medal and Honor Books, 1922-Present) it seems to me to be logical that we should do the same.--Plad2 (talk) 22:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

text: Support--Should be merged just like the Newberry Honors. static shakedown 19:54, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger Proposal 

message: I'm aiming to bring this up to featured list status in the near future (i.e. relatively shortly after Newbery Medal passes). Noting here any sources I run across which would be helpful in this article:
*Dives into what the Caldecott means at the time of writing.
*Study of minority groups in awards
-Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:26, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Caldecott (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 22:04, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress