Web Awards UK
Menu
Submit a website
Editorial review

Work is judged in context, not by appearance alone.

Every eligible website is reviewed against the same five-part framework. Payment covers the review process and never guarantees recognition.

How assessment works

A considered review of the live experience.

Web Awards UK evaluates the submitted website as it is available during review. We consider the audience, purpose, format, and constraints of the project before reaching an editorial decision.

The framework is consistent, but it is not a mechanical checklist. A campaign site, an online shop, and a public service platform solve different problems. Reviewers therefore look at how well each project fulfils its own purpose while maintaining a high standard of craft.

What reviewers examine

  • The live desktop and mobile experience
  • Key navigation paths, interactions, and calls to action
  • Readability, accessibility, responsiveness, and loading behaviour
  • The relationship between concept, visual execution, technology, and content
  • The accuracy of submitted credits and project information
The evaluation framework

Five dimensions of digital craft.

01

Design & Aesthetics

We consider visual hierarchy, typography, colour, composition, consistency, responsive art direction, and whether the design supports the project's purpose.

02

Usability & Access

We review navigation, interaction clarity, mobile behaviour, readability, keyboard use, accessible structure, and the ease with which visitors can complete key tasks.

03

Creativity & Motion

We look for an original idea expressed with purpose. Animation, interaction, and technical effects are valued when they strengthen the experience rather than distract from it.

04

Code & Performance

We assess loading experience, responsive stability, semantic implementation, technical reliability, and whether engineering choices serve users across devices and connection speeds.

05

Content & Storytelling

We consider the quality and structure of writing, imagery, calls to action, brand voice, and how effectively the website communicates to its intended audience.

Strong work is coherent across the framework. Excellence in one area can distinguish a project, but it does not automatically cancel serious problems elsewhere.

From entry to decision

The review process.

01

Eligibility check

We confirm that the website is publicly accessible, that the submission contains enough information to review, and that the submitter is authorised to enter the work.

02

Editorial review

The live website is examined across the five published criteria. Reviewers consider the whole experience on desktop and mobile, not only the submitted screenshot.

03

Editorial decision

The evidence is considered as a whole. A project may be especially strong in one discipline, but obvious usability, access, reliability, or attribution problems can affect the outcome.

04

Record and notification

The submitter receives the outcome by email. Selected work is prepared for a permanent archive profile with its award level, studio credit, category, and recognition date.

Recognition outcomes

Recognition reflects the strength and context of the work.

  • Nominee: work that meets the publication standard and merits a permanent place in the archive.
  • Special Mention: work showing notable distinction in a specific discipline such as typography, interaction, storytelling, accessibility, or performance.
  • Website of the Day: a standout project selected from the active field of recognised work.
  • Website of the Month: exceptional work chosen through comparative review of the month's recognised projects.
  • Website of the Year: the highest annual distinction for an outstanding project in the Web Awards UK archive.