Call me old-fashioned, but is there any reason why CK entries can't stay Booker Prize rather than the "Man Booker Prize for Fiction," as they've now all been changed? It's always been known as the Booker Prize in everyday conversation, and it was only in 2002 that "Man" came on board. (If we want to get technical, then, arguably only books since that time, if any, should say Man Booker, but since it's widely known and referred to as "Booker" only, can't we keep that?) The "for Fiction" just seems extraneous. Even the award's own website just says Man Booker Prize. It's easily distinguised from the Man Booker International Prize without the need to add "for fiction."

Couldn't the full official new name just be listed in the "Award Description" section of the page?
(edited to add links)

Message edited by its author, Jul 5, 2009, 6:58pm.

It is simply "the Booker Prize" to me.

Personally, I think they should stay as Booker Prize but if it is desperately necessary for someone to change them to Man Booker Prize for Fiction, then I agree with #1, only books from 2002 should have 'Man' appended.

Well, the horse has left the barn - so there's not much one can do now, right?

Although I'm with you - I've always called it the Booker myself. I doubt anyone gets all that riled up outside of formal press releases otherwise. (Okay, maybe Man does...)

Call me churlish, but I'm tempted to change them back for the entries prior to it becoming 'Man Booker' ... but that's probably because I have a stonking headache and am being most uncharitable ... although, I don't remember there being any discussion about whether it was right to change them all to the current format ... but then, I have a grumpy hat on today so I should probably move away from the thread ... ;-)

I get pretty riled up about the store in Seattle originally known as The Bon Marche. It's been purchased and renamed by a national chain, but I refuse to acknowledge this. And the Seahawks play in Seahawks Stadium, not Long Distance Company Field.

So it's the Booker Prize in my world.

But as long as all the winners have the same name in the field here, I'll live.

What I really don't want is for post-2002 winners to have one name and pre-2002 winners to have another. Because that messes up the award page.

What I really don't want is for post-2002 winners to have one name and pre-2002 winners to have another. Because that messes up the award page

I can see where you're coming from but there's no consistency with these 'sponsored' awards as the Whitbread and the Costa are treated as separate awards on CK (whereas they were merely a change of sponsor). Maybe that's what the discussion should really be ... what consensus do we have about how to deal with awards where name changes come from a change in sponsorship. If Whitbread and Costa are the norm, Booker should be split. If the person that edited Booker to be Man Booker is correct then Whitbread and Costa should be combined.

To be fair, I think there's a case for keeping them combined under the most recent name for the reason KingRat puts forward (this possibly being the most easily 'policeable' option too) but it grates because I tend to think of Northern Lights as a Whitbread winner not a Costa etc. I certainly wouldn't jump in and change them all without reaching some kind of consensus.

Someone did go in and change them all recently from Booker to Man Booker.

What if the Nobel prize one day gets sponsored by Exxon Mobil? Would we be forced to list to it here as the Exxon Mobil Nobel Prize, or wouldn't we just continue to refer to it by the name by which it is and has always been known in everyday conversation?

I would go with the base name for the award personally, not necessarily the common name. Sometimes the common name is confusing, as in the case of two different Campbell Awards.

The Booker Prize is a sponsor name as well. The original sponsor was Booker-McConnell. The Nobel Prize can be thought of us a sponsored prize too, as it was given established by the man himself, though posthumously. As opposed to the Campbell Memorial Award which is given in memory of John W. Campbell. I'm not against sponsors names in the award name. I call Seahawks Stadium that name because it was the original name, not because the new name is sponsored.

Mostly, the principles I want to see are:

First priority: keep the award winners on the same award page so that I can see which of the award winners I have.

Second priority: use a name long enough and specific/descriptive enough so that users know what award it is, but no longer and no more specific/descriptive.

Third priority: don't change the name unless there's a really good reason.

By priority, I mean that guidelines of higher priority take precedence.

I'm in agreement with most (all?) of you here. We are in an age of sponsorship but that makes dealing with things increasingly hard. Don't get me talking about football bowl games changing their historical names for the sake of sponsorship! It gets me all angry.

I'd go with Book Prize, Nobel Prize, etc. If you absolutely MUST show that Man is the new sponsor add 'Man Booker Prize for Fiction' as another entry to the awards. That way people can actually get listings for both if they like (and hey, it might be interesting one day).

So I guess my answer is: two entries.

Changing the name on all the awards every time the name changes seems wrong to me, I would tend to leave them as the name at the time the award was given, of course using 2 entries could help keep them tied together across sponsors, while having the correct current name.

How about we leave the CK entries as the 'common' name eg Booker Prize and get notes on the award page 'this prize was sponsored by Quikee Mart from yyyy to yyyy and known as the Quikee Mart Booker Prize for Fiction'.

Or something like that?

How about we just assign a random string of characters to tie all the works with the same logical prize together and in the description give the name the prize actually had in each year. Does that need a smiley?

So can I take cD's word as the official line here, and re-add "Booker Prize" for all the entries that were changed to "Man Booker Prize" (while leaving Man Booker)? Should we remove "Man Booker" for the ones that were awarded prior to the name change? Also, can we remove "for fiction" from the name, since that's not typically how we list things here, and since that information can easily be put in the description?
Anyone else want to weigh in here?

I'm in favor of dropping "for Fiction".

I'd personally prefer not to have two entries for the same award, but awards is already overpopulated enough with crap awards that adding one more isn't going to make it any worse.

14: Yes, yes, and yes.

That sounds definitive.

Thanks for the response. By the way, if anyone has time to get to this before I do, go right ahead!

Finally got around to this. All the books are back on the Booker Prize page, but I also added an extra award line for the Man Booker Prize for only those awarded since the name change. I took out "for Fiction" which seems to be used extremely rarely, even on the Prize's own website, and since the CK convention or consensus seems to be for short and simple.