Talk:List of EGOT winners/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

dumb acronym

EGOT (ee-got) rolls off the tongue about as well as a Welch place-name. What's wrong with GOTE or GOET (goat)? ... or GETO (ghetto)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.29.87.28 (talk) 04:02, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

I always assumed it was pronounced with a silent "T" ..... Idealfarmer (talk) 20:55, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

@Idealfarmer: nope. Watch 30 Rock's Dealbreakers Talk Show No. 0001 episode, as Tracy Jordan (Tracy Morgan) talks all about it. Elisfkc (talk) 01:44, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on List of people who have won Academy, Emmy, Grammy, and Tony Awards. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140507122405/http://www.cbs.com/shows/late_show/wahoo_gazette?filter_date=2010-01-12 to http://www.cbs.com/shows/late_show/wahoo_gazette?filter_date=2010-01-12

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:20, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Clearing up franchise rules

As the list of three-award franchises grows ever larger, I think this is a good time to set some rules on what is included for these awards. If a song written for the franchise wins a Grammy, but that Grammy wasn't given in conjunction with the film (as is the case with Rocky and Looney Tunes), did the franchise really win a Grammy? Do spinoffs and prequels count, as for The Wizard of Oz and Looney Tunes? Do all adaptations count, even if they aren't the same story, such as Titanic? I just want to set some ground rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbb618 (talk • contribs) 14:18, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

As the one who initially added this section, my original thought was that franchises were simply groups of titles that are under one owner or a couple owners that were based off of a series of manuscript, be it musicals, movie scripts, or a book series. The original list, as seen above consisted of Alaadin, Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King, Mary Poppins, The Muppets, and The Producers. Added to the list before it was moved to the article were The Music Man, The Sound of Music, Cabaret, Sweeney Todd, Dreamgirls, West Side Story, Les Miserables, & Chicago. The best test in my opinion would be, if the franchise's titles were listed with no description as to what it the list is of and what each title is, the average person would be able to figure out that the list is the franchise in under 30 seconds. I do not know what the Rocky, Looney Tunes, and Titanic examples are to weigh in on that discussion, though if you (Sbb618) could enlighten me, that would be appreciated. Of course, this is just my opinion and my original intent, which may be overruled in the following discussion. Elisfkc (talk) 19:32, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Rocky won its Grammy for a song that was written for the film, but didn't win its award in conjunction with the film. (Note: I originally included Looney Tunes under this classification, but I missed I Believe I Can Fly's win for "Best Song Written Specifically for a Motion Picture or for Television", so...that's pretty valid. Ignore that.) Eye of the Tiger (from Rocky III) won a Grammy for Best Rock Performance by Duo or Group with Vocal. Should that win be credited to Rocky III? The Titanic dispute started when someone added it to the list, including the 1997 Best Musical winner with the 1997 Best Picture winner. This date conjunction is a complete coincidence, however, and the two works share no similarity or main characters beyond being about the Titanic. They just happen to have the same title. I removed it from the list on those grounds. In conclusion, I believe that Looney Tunes should be included, but Rocky and Titanic should not. Sbb618 (talk) 20:23, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

@Sbb618: sounds right to me. Elisfkc (talk) 05:15, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm not crazy about considering The Wizard of Oz as a "franchise" for this purpose either, inasmuch as "franchise" sounds like it means a commercial property and the different Oz adaptations—the 1939 film, The Wiz, Wicked, etc.—were made independently of each other, with different intellectual property owners, etc. (If the 1940 film The Thief of Bagdad had won an Oscar, would we count it toward the total for the "Aladdin franchise"? AJD (talk) 04:19, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Personally, I think that because they share the same characters, they count as the same franchise, unlike, say, Titanic, where a Tony-winning musical had nothing to do with an Oscar-winning film. Additionally, both The Wiz and Wicked are clearly based directly off Victor Fleming's The Wizard of Oz, a common property, so I'd say it counts. The Thief of Bagdad did win an Oscar, by the way. It won three. But it's not the same story, so it doesn't count. Hope I made my train of thought clear. Sbb618 (talk) 05:56, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Is The Wiz based on Victor Fleming's The Wizard of Oz? It seems to me it's based off L. Frank Baum's The Wizard of Oz, without much involvement from the Fleming film. (And while Wicked obviously does borrow material from the Fleming film it's more in the realm of "fair use" than being based off it directly.) I'd be somewhat surprised if either of them had intellectual-property rights to adapt the Fleming film. (The novel is in the public domain.)

I don't know how I missed The Thief of Bagdad's Oscars. Perhaps a better example, though: if George C. Scott had won the Emmy he was nominated for for the 1976 TV-movie Beauty and the Beast, would that qualify Beauty and the Beast (Disney franchise) for an EGOT? I think clearly not, but maybe you disagree? (I agree there are situations in which this can get thorny, though. Clearly there are some respects in which Sony Pictures' Spider-Man film franchise is a different franchise from Marvel Studios' Marvel Cinematic Universe franchise, but in other respects they're both part of the broader Marvel Comics franchise.) AJD (talk) 17:06, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

I guess you're right about The Wiz. Your Spiderman analogy is kind of what I'm trying to get at with the shared characters, but you're raising some great questions I hadn't thought about before. I mean...I guess I would give Beauty and the Beast the EGOT for that? I don't really know. Sbb618 (talk) 21:09, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

I personally would not. I see it as the Disney franchise of Beauty and the Beast, not any others. The name of the article that talks about the franchise is Beauty and the Beast (Disney franchise), which means it must be Disney material to count. For the Spider-Man scenario, it is kind of up for grabs. Considering the fact that they are all based on the comics, you could say that they are one franchise. However, part of my original idea, which I failed to mention before this since it didn't come up, was that they are all in the same cannon. For instance, each part of The Lion King either is a direct remake of another part (movie to musical) or recognizes previous work as part of it (such as the TV show). Since the Marvel Spider-Mans fail to recognize the Sony ones or the musical, I fail to see them as one franchise. This is, once again, just my personal view and original intent, which may be overruled in the following discussion. Elisfkc (talk) 21:48, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Archiving

It seems that this talk page is way too long. Since Help:Archiving a talk page says to establish a consensus on a article talk page before setting up a bot, I would like to suggest using ClueBot III's sequentially numbered archives for this page. If there is no other opinion in 7 days or if the consensus agrees with me, then I will enable it at that time. Elisfkc (talk) 19:48, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

 Done Elisfkc (talk) 23:05, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

How exactly are winners defined?

For example: Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova wrote "Falling Slowly" and the rest of the music for Once. They won the Academy Award for the film version. Once was then, of course, adopted into a musical. Which won for Best Musical, lyrics and music credited to Hansard and Irglova. That cast recording of their songs won the Grammy. Have they won one, two or three awards? Hansard's page says he only has an Academy Award, but it would seem to me that he has two if not three. 2601:18D:0:7CC2:5:6BF4:AE:9844 (talk)A Curious Interloper —Preceding undated comment added 21:46, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Hansard and Irglova only have one award each. They won the Oscar, because they wrote the song, but the Tony was awarded to the producers of the musical, and the Grammy was given to the music producers and principal soloists. If the musical had won the Tony for Best Original Score (it wasn't even nominated), they would have won a Tony, because that award is given to the writers. Sbb618 (talk) 21:52, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Quincy Jones

It is stated in his wikipedia article that Quincy Jones won the Tony Award for Best Revival of a Musical in 2016, therefore becoming the first African-American producer to have won an Emmy, Grammy, Tony and an Oscar, meaning he's an EGOT winner (although his Oscar is an honorary one). Has it been updated, or is there something wrong with this info? --Lluvia Roja (talk) 16:36, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure being a producer counts for this article. Also, it sounds like in The Color Purple#Broadway revival (2015–2017) section that he had nothing to do with the revival. Elisfkc (talk) 17:01, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I searched the Tonys database for his name (http://www.tonyawards.com/p/tonys_search, use advanced search), and it looks like he did produce the revival. So yeah, he counts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbb618 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Franchises Section

Shouldn't this be deleted seeing as there is not a single source cited that shows that anyone other than some, admittedly, dedicated wikipedia editors, are actually keeping track of this or care about this. And if we are going to keep it, shouldn't this section have at least ONE source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schnapps17 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

It's mentioned in this article, at least: http://people.com/awards/what-is-an-egot-the-grand-slam-of-show-business-explained/ Sbb618 (talk) 00:06, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Just saw this. Only 5 of the 12 people have a reference. As far as franchises go, the writing for those entries is based directly on the people entries. In fact, the three awards list is even better on the franchise side, because they link to the specific award ceremonies where they won the award stated. Also, thanks for giving us the source. --Elisfkc (talk) 15:24, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

It seems quite likely that that source is the result of citogenesis: that is, People got its information from this very Wikipedia article, and therefore that article isn't a valid source to cite for the information here. AJD (talk) 05:17, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

The article is called "List of people...". It should either be moved, or the franchises should be spun off into their own article. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:28, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Seconding what Ahecht says. Franchises and people are very different, and a list of EGOT-winning franchises should be separate from a list of EGOT-winning people. Also, given the potential breadth of a media franchise and the number of people involved, one earning all four awards is far more common and far less impressive than one person earning the four awards all by themselves—which is the point of the EGOT's uniqueness. Trivialist (talk) 23:47, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

As I've pointed out before, I believe it is a harder achievement for franchises, since most franchises only have a couple shots at the awards, if they even get a second chance. Elisfkc (talk) 01:19, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

I've commented above that I don't think "franchises" are well-defined for the purposes of this article. I still think that's true, and they don't really have any business being here. AJD (talk) 05:17, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Ok, well, I'm going to follow Ahecht's advise and make a separate article. Elisfkc (talk) 14:31, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Age at completion vs Years to complete

Wouldn't the more appropriate metric be how old a person was when they finished their EGOT? For example, Robert Lopez would have halved his "Years to complete" from 10 to 5 if he had not won in 2004 and 2008 (Emmy in 2010, Tony in 2011, Grammy in 2012, and Oscar in 2014). In theory, you could argue the "Years to complete" should start at the start of their career, not when they won their first EGOT-eligible award. I think it would be best to list both age at completion and years to complete. - Paul^T+/_C 16:17, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

I agree, now that you mention it, to count the years from the first EGOT award win doesn't really make sense (if your goal was an EGOT and you wanted to say how long it took you, you wouldn't start counting from the day you received the first EGOT award). So, I even lean towards replacing 'Years to complete' with the 'Age at completion', but I guess including both will be fine. Good idea. Felida97 (talk) 19:46, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

PEGOT

Once again, there are zero references in the PEGOT section. Schnapps17 (talk) 17:18, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Four nominations

I'm opening this to establish consensus regarding the four nominations section. I think this section should only include people who have received nominations for all four awards in competitive categories. Currently, there are four people listed who have received three competitive nominations and one special award (Howard Ashman, Judy Garland, Steve Martin, and Bruce Springsteen) and I think these people shouldn't be there. The introductory sentence of the section says "The following people have not won all four awards in competitive categories, but have received at least one nomination for each of them", which simply isn't true for these four individuals. They haven't received a nomination for each of the four awards and a special award isn't really equivalent to a competitive nomination. If they one day receive the missing nomination, they can be included with a note regarding the special award, but until then, I think they shouldn't be included. Thank you in advance for your comments on this issue. Felida97 (talk) 12:04, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

I might as well chime in here, since I took the other side in the debate. I think that we should keep the people with three nominations and one non-competitive award in the four nominations section. They all have a note explaining their situation next to them. If any of them won their fourth award, they would be listed up in the main section at the top, with a note attached, just like they are now. Yes, they're listed in the section below for winning two full awards and one non-competitive, but nominations for all four awards is a separate distinction that isn't noted anywhere else on the page. It's a notable achievement, and I think it should stay as is. Sbb618 (talk) 12:53, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

You're right, nominations for all four awards is a separate distinction and I agree that it's a notable achievement, but these people haven't achieved it. Felida97 (talk) 13:49, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

I think the spirit of the section is "hey, look, these people could have completed the EGOT if they had won the nominations they got". If you look at it from that perspective, winning a special award without getting nominated puts them in a spot where, had they won their nominations, they would have reached Babs/Liza status - 4 awards but not all of them in competitive categories. Schnapps17 (talk) 03:23, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Legend, Webber, and Rice

How do they qualify? The first line of the article states "Fifteen people[1][2] have won all four major annual American entertainment awards in a competitive, individual (non-group) category of the Emmy, Grammy, Oscar, and Tony (EGOT) Awards." (Emphasis mine) How do they qualify if they all won the same Primetime Emmy? doesn't that mean they won it as a group? The Pony Toast 🍞 (Talk) 15:47, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

In this case, that just means that they were individually named in the award's nomination, as opposed to them being part of an ensemble or group that won an award. For example, a principal soloist on a pre-2012 Grammy for best musical theater album (such as Kristen Chenoweth or Angela Lensbury) wouldn't qualify because they weren't named on the nomination back then. It would also rule out SAG-style "best ensemble" awards, which are currently proposed for the Tonys. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:18, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

SAG ensemble awards are different, though, because they have specific winners and rules about who they are awarded to, it's not just the whole cast en masse. You're dead-on about the rest. Sbb618 (talk) 19:57, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Sbb618 and Ahecht, thanks for the info! The Pony Toast 🍞 (Talk) 21:53, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Also, how do they count when Jesus Christ Superstar didn't win any Emmys? The Mo-Ja'al (talk) 23:00, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

The Band's Visit

Just putting this here for later: The cast of The Band's Visit is up for a Daytime Emmy for their performance on the Today Show. If they end up winning, Katrina Lenk and Ari'el Stachel will join the list of those who are missing an Oscar (Tony Shalhoub won't, because he didn't win the Grammy).

Also, we should reconsider the "non-group" listing in the header, since the official nomination is given to "Cast of The Band's Visit". Same with last year and Rachel Bay Jones (the Emmy was given to "Ben Platt and the Cast of Dear Evan Hansen"). Sbb618 (talk) 21:02, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Bill Sherman

According to the provided source, Sherman has won the Tony, Grammy and Emmy (the latter a "2011 Emmy Award for Outstanding Original Song-Children’s and Animation for Sesame Street's 'What I Am'"). According to IMDb (I know it's not reliable, but still) that category is a Daytime Emmy Award. He has been nominated to a Primetime once only. © Tbhotch^™ (en-3). 23:32, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

@Tbhotch: Daytime Emmys count. Otherwise Whoopie and Lopez wouldn't have EGOTs. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 23:58, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Rita Moreno5.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

PEGOT - Peabody

Considering the debated stated at the beginning of the article whether the 'P' in PEGOT stands for Peabody Award or Pulitzer Prize, is there a reason why there is a "People who have won a Pulitzer, and are only missing one EGOT award" segment but not one for the Peabody?

Going through some of the people listed under Three Competitive Awards, James Moll (missing a Tony) is an example of someone who would be listed in such a section. I admit to not fully understanding how the Peabody Awards is credited to individuals when a project wins one, so within the list of 'Missing a Tony Award' there could also be Brian Glazer who produced Peabody-winning Friday Night Lights or Martin Scorsese who directed Peabody-winning No Direction Home.

Similarly, in the notes for Three Competitive Awards, there is "P" for Person has won the Pulitzer Prize but nothing for winning a Peabody. Should it be "PP" and "PA" for Pulitzer Prize and Peabody Award, respectively?

P.S. James Moll is listed as a Peabody Winner in the categories of his Wikipedia page. He won for the documentary 'Survivors of the Holocaust'.

P.S.2. Other people who were involved with Peabody winning projects:

• Stephen Soundheim (subject of Six by Soundheim, missing an Emmy)
• Jason Robards (narrator of Schizophrenia: Voices of an Illness, missing a Grammy)
• Martin Charnin (broadcasting for S'Wonderful, S'Marvelous, S'Gershwin, missing an Oscar, listed as winning a Peabody on his page)
• Trey Parker and Matt Stone (writing, directing, and voice-acting for South Park, missing an Oscar, listed as winning a Peabody on his page)
• Anne Garefino (executive producer of South Park, missing an Oscar)
• Lily Tomlin (missing an Oscar, listed as winning a Peabody for Edith Ann's Christmas: Just Say Noël and a Peabody for narrating and executive producing The Celluloid Closet)
• George Grizzard (starred in The Adams Chronicles, missing an Oscar)
• Julie Harris (conception and starring in Currier Bell, Esquire, missing an Oscar)
• Quincy Jones (featured in The Miles Davis Radio Project, missing an Oscar)
• Bob Fosse (directing and producing for Liza with a Z, missing a Grammy)
• Liza Minelli (starring in Liza with a Z, missing a competitive Grammy)
• Fred Ebb (writing, producing, and composing for Liza with a Z, missing an Oscar)
• John Kander (composing for Liza with a Z, missing an Oscar)
• Billy Porter (starring in Pose, missing an Oscar)
• Charles Strouse (composed and wrote lyrics for Annie, missing an Oscar, states he won a Peabody on his website)

47.186.225.213 (talk) 00:12, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

"PEGOT" is not even a commonly used or agreed upon term. Only two sources are cited in that part of the article, and one of them is from the official Peabody Awards site. Trivialist (talk) 16:46, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

On Stan Lathan's inclusion

The article lists Stan Lathan as having 3/4 awards (Tony, Grammy, and Emmy), but this is debatable. His Emmy Award is completely valid; however, the Tony Award for Best Special Theatrical Event is special (but competitive, which might still make it count), and neither Grammy Award for Best Comedy Album lists him as recipient. I believe that's argument enough to be excluded; any opinions on this are appreciated. 190.193.171.57 (talk) 01:37, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Lathan is listed on the Grammy website as a two-time recipient, as seen here and also further down here. I think his Tony should fully count too, since it was in a competitive category and not just a juried honor (Liza Minnelli's award in the same category doesn't have the "non-competitive" disclaimer next to it). Sbb618 (talk) 02:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

British equivalent?

On the Triple Crown of Acting page it mentions the British equiv, BAFTA TV, BAFTA Film, Oliiver. Shouldn't there be a Brit version of the EGOT? It should be mentioned here. -- 20:05, 5 February 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.183.33 (talk)

• We can't make up a version of the EGOT for other countries ourselves; that would be original research. The concept of the combination of awards has to be notable in itself. For example, well before Wikipedia was established, I remember reading in the Guinness Book of World Records about how Rita Moreno was the only person to have won the Oscar, Emmy, Grammy, and Tony, thus indicating that the idea of winning all four awards was a notable concept. In 1985, The New York Times referred to Moreno as "the only actress to win a Tony, an Emmy, a Grammy and an Oscar." [1] (In actuality, Moreno wasn't the first person or the first actress to have won all four awards, but the fact that these sources wrote about the combination of wins helps establish that this combination is indeed notable.) --Metropolitan90 (talk) 19:02, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 27 April 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to List of EGOT winners. The consensus for moving is strong and the argument that the entire point of this page is the acronym, and hence it's use in the title is excusable, is convincing. (non-admin closure) FOARP (talk) 19:45, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

---

List of people who have won Academy, Emmy, Grammy, and Tony Awards → List of people who have won Emmy, Grammy, Oscar, and Tony Awards – Here's another article where WP:CONSISTENT apparently conflicts with WP:COMMONNAME, and consensus needs to determine which guideline prevails. Since there has not yet been an RM on record for this specific issue, better late than never. On the one hand the current article title is consistent with the Academy Awards article title in using "Academy" instead of "Oscar". On the other hand, most of the sources cited in this article use "Oscar", and explicitly spell out the "EGOT" acronym (Emmy, Grammy, Oscar, Tony), and put those awards in that order when referring to this list of people. Also when I do a Google search of "academy emmy grammy tony winners" many of the reliable sources I see that talk about the EGOT winners primarily use "Oscar", while many of those that primarily use "Academy" seem to be Wikipedia mirrors. There is also precedence for using "Oscar" instead of "Academy": it's currently Oscar bait and Oscar season, not "Academy Award bait" and "Academy Award season". Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:46, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

• How about List of EGOT winners? Although acronyms should generally be avoided in article titles, EGOT is such well-known shorthand for the topic, that this may qualify as an exception. It's also more WP:CONCISE. Otherwise, I support the proposal as being closer to a common name. Station1 (talk) 22:59, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
• I also like List of EGOT winners. But as an aside, I think the current title could actually be improved just by changing the order to: List of people who have won Emmy, Grammy, Tony, and Academy Awards. The reason that the "Academy" part of the current title stands out like a sore thumb is that it's the only one that isn't used as an abbreviation without the word "award". i.e. you can win an Emmy, you can win a Tony, but you can't win an Academy. So relocating 'Academy' so that it's next to the word 'Award' helps ease the dissonance. Colin M (talk) 00:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
• List of EGOT winners makes more sense to me too. -- Calidum 15:16, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
• Support List of EGOT winners, as title pertains to collective acronym anyway. Best, --Discographer (talk) 10:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
• Support List of EGOT winners. I've pulled up this list a number of times just as a reader, and I don't think I've ever done so through a route other than typing in "EGOT" and relying on the redirect, always feeling a bit bemused to be taken to such an unwieldy title. If it's not moved to this title, though, "Academy" should definitely be changed to "Oscar", preferable with reordering in E/G/O/T order. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 11:05, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
• Support List of people who have won Emmy, Grammy, Oscar, and Tony Awards as per proposal. EGOT isn't a universally understood acronym, and I don't think it's ideal to have it as the title of this article when there are decent alternatives. Agree that title reads strangely as it stands (not least since Emmy and Grammy awards are also awarded by an "Academy") and think that the proposed title is much tidier. It also feels more consistent, both internally and in relation to the EGOT acronym. Dybeck (talk) 09:31, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
• Comment: This page seems to be more than just a list. The lead seems to suggest it was intended to be about the acronym itself, supplemented by a list. -2pou (talk) 21:12, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nobel

User:Felida97, I based the addition of Dylan's Nobel partly on Francis Ford Coppola's famous claim that Apocalypse Now would be the first film to win a Nobel Prize[2] (it didn't, despite winning 2 Oscars). Others undoubtedly aspired to it without saying so out loud. There is no "NEGOT" because nobody in show biz before 2016 actually got the Nobel, yet it fits the EGOT concept and frankly transcends the regular EGOT categories. So some kind of special mention seems apropos, though I'm not attached to my wording. I won't unrevert a 2nd time but I believe this is something to consider. 2602:24A:DE47:BA60:8FCB:EA4E:7FBD:4814 (talk) 19:30, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing this topic here on the talk page. I agree that the Nobel prize is probably a higher honor than the EGOT awards, but I still think this is out of the scope of this article or the specific section. But I will also not revert you again and I will just wait and see what other editors think. Felida97 (talk) 07:17, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good. It occurs to me that the Nobel doesn't have a 1 year eligibility window like the EGOT, so Apocalypse Now might theoretically still win it, heh. 2602:24A:DE47:BA60:8FCB:EA4E:7FBD:4814 (talk) 21:52, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Links in EGOT Winner Chart

The blue name links in the EGOT winner chart do not seem to be working for me. They do not lead to the person’s wiki page or scroll me down to their section of this page either. I am on mobile so it might just be an issue with that! I don’t know proper code technique or else I’d try to figure it out myself. Noavailableusernames1832 (talk) 21:22, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Who counts as a winner?

How exactly is it determined which of the people who helped create an award-winning work themselves won that award? Jennifer Hudson is listed as having won a Tony for A Strange Loop, but it was the play itself that won a Tony (for Best Musical), and Hudson is only one of many producers of the play. So where is the line drawn? Does everyone credited in a Best Picture Oscar winner count as having won an Oscar, including actors who only had one line? Oooooooseven (talk) 14:56, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Mikenichols.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:07, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

List of franchises that have won Academy, Emmy, Grammy, and Tony Awards

The article mentioned in the section title was AfD'ed with consensus to merge to here recently. However, I am aware that the content had been split from here in 2017 as not covered by the topic of this page and the main reference is strongly suspected of being CIRCULAR and ultimately derived from this Wikipedia article itself. Therefore I would value any input by editors of this page on what if anything should be merged from List of franchises that have won Academy, Emmy, Grammy, and Tony Awards.

References

Felix QW (talk) 15:09, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Can people please stop trying to make "franchise EGOTs" happen? Other than that editors creating the idea, and that one article that was basically using Wikipedia as a source, they aren't a commonly accepted thing. The point of an EGOT is that it's an accomplishment by one person. A franchise "getting" an EGOT just means that four different people won an award, which isn't an extraordinary accomplishment. Trivialist (talk) 03:39, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Should the Obama be on the list for those with 3 of 4?

Both have won Emmys, Grammys, and a shared Oscar. The only thing they need is a Tony. --Aabicus (talk) 02:38, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

As of September 2022, Barack Obama has won two Grammys and one Emmy. Michelle Obama has won one Grammy. I don't know what "shared Oscar" you're talking about. "Crip Camp," on which the Obamas were Executive Producers, was nominated for an Oscar but didn't win. Jhlechner (talk) 22:24, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

I don't think executive producers would get the award anyway. Trivialist (talk) 23:48, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

He won for American Factory. JoannaWarden (talk) 05:59, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

He won the Oscar for American Factory. JoannaWarden (talk) 06:00, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

• Neither of the Obamas won an Oscar for American Factory, nor have either of them been nominated for an Oscar. You can check this out in the Academy Awards database at https://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ -- the persons who were the Oscar recipients for American Factory were Steven Bognar, Julia Reichert, and Jeff Reichert. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 00:06, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Remove spoiler in Lede

*** WARNING: THE FOLLOWING CONTAINS A CONTAINS 30-ROCK SPOLIER *** — Preceding unsigned comment added by FillsHerTease (talk • contribs) 01:34, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

I am currently watching 30 Rock and came here to find out if anyone had achieved an EGOT in real life, because - as pointed out in the Lede - the Tracy Jordan character in the show sets out to achieve it. However, I now know that the Tracy Jordan character achieves his goal, not from continuing to watch 30 Rock, but because of a completely unnecessary spoiler!

So ... if no one objects, I am going to delete the spoiler part of the Lede, because it has nothing whatsoever to do with the EGOT. Mentioning that the Tracy Jordan character in 30 Rock helped to achieve wider recognition for the EGOT term - in real life - is certainly pertinent, so I will leave that, but the spoiler regarding him achieving the goal in the show is superfluous, and it's only potential achievement is to spoil that character arc for other people like myself, so therefore it should be removed... FillsHerTease (talk) 06:34, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia policy, "It is not acceptable to delete information from an article because you think it spoils the plot." 141.211.205.174 (talk) 12:16, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

It's one thing to delete a spoiler from an article concerning the narrative work in question - which is CLEARLY what the Wikipedia policy is talking about [i.e. "except for the content disclaimer and section headings (such as "Plot" or "Ending"), which imply the presence of spoilers."] - and another thing entirely to remove a spoiler from a completely unrelated article, in which a reader may read a spoiler with no expectation of one being present. I REPEAT: "the spoiler regarding him achieving the goal in the show is superfluous, and it's only potential achievement is to spoil that character arc for other people like myself, so therefore it should be removed..." Removing spoiler again. Kindly do not replace it without discussion. FillsHerTease (talk) 08:06, 1 November 2022 (UTC)