Talk:Pulitzer Prize

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pulitzer Prize article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 180 days

Awards Top‑importance

	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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Journalism Top‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Literature Mid‑importance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature 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.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Media High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media 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.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia articles

High

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

WikiProject Media To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Mackay Radio
Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite
NPOV : Content (media and publishing)
Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper
Other :
- Answer requests for comments

United States: History Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as Low-importance).

On 16 November 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to Pulitzer Prizes. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Duke Ellington

Duke Ellington was voted the winner of the Pulitzer Prize in 1965, but the Pulitzer Board refused to accept the ruling and decided not to give an award out that year. The Pulitzer Prize had been criticized for only focusing on classical music and not other genres, such as jazz or film scoring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.184.116.57 (talk) 22:01, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The following is misleading

The following is misleading:

"There are two other humanities categories that have been added:

  * Drama 
  * Music"

This implies that the drama prize is recent or added sometime after establishment of the prizes. According to pulitzer.org, the drama prize was specified in Joseph Pulitzer's 1904 will. While the music, poetry and photography awards were added at a later date, the drama prize was in the original set. This article makes the drama award seem like an afterthought.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Edc99801 (talk • contribs) on 16:35, 9 August 2005

Multiple Winners

I am interested to know if Robert E. Sherwood and Eugene O'Neill are the only 4-time winners? And was Margaret Leech the only 2-time female winner? Thanks. -- K72ndst (talk) 13:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some people would say that Dana Priest won twice. Although technically the Public Service award goes to the newspaper, it's actually considered far more prestigious to have your name in the citation, than to win any of the other journalism awards. Robert Frost won the poetry prize four times. Possibly others, but I don't think so. Thomas Friedman and Walt Bogdanich have won thrice. --JayHenry (talk) 00:05, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Under Two Time Winners, add Biologist E.O. Wilson for General Non-Fiction in 1979 and 1991. (```` jennyamh) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jennyamh (talk • contribs) 05:44, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did Robert E. Sherwood win four Prizes, or even two? He is not listed in section 3.1 Pulitzer Prize#Individuals.

"Recipients of multiple Pulitzer Prizes include:"

If the list is not complete then its criteria need explanation, at least, and it may need to be completed.

If its true that no one has won two consecutive awards, and Gene Weingarten alone has won two in three years, that should be stated. --P64 (talk) 15:17, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nelson Harding won two consecutive awards, for Editorial Cartooning. In general, I noticed that a number of people won multiple Editorial Cartooning awards. Some of them were listed, but not others. I attempted to fix this. DaWarMage (talk) 20:23, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2014. See #Repeat winners below.

"The board"

(This was raised back in 2007 without any apparent resolution)

--see 2007, #Independent board -P64

Near the start of the article it says:

"The board selects the winner by majority vote from the nominations or bypass the nominations and select a different entry with a 75% majority vote. The board can also vote no award. The board gets no compensation for its work."

What board is this? Who appoints them? ... --SGBailey (talk) 14:20, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That quotation is from section 1.0; the Board is covered in section 5. The early reference needs a wikilink to the later section.

The first paragraph of section 5 Pulitzer Prize#Board says, "The board makes all prize decisions.[4]" (Topping, 2008). But section 8 Pulitzer Prize#Controversies the trustees of Columbia University overruled the board in 1962 (Hohenberg, 1997). These notes need either correction or confirmation with explanation, presumably at least a date after 1962 when the Prize board supposedly became the final arbiter. --P64 (talk) 15:05, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Repeat winners

The list of people who have won more than one prize is not complete. But it is now complete, subject to my clerical errors, for repeat winners within 12 of the 21 current categories.

(duplicates my comment atop section 3.1) !--2013-12-26 believed complete for winners of two prizes within any one of the 7 arts & letters categories; also Commentary Criticism EditorialCartooning EditorialWriting FeatureWriting, ie 5 journalism categories-->

The numbers of repeat winners in the five listed journalism categories are 0, 0, 17, 0, and 1.

For those twelve categories (and no others on my part) the prize articles --which include complete lists of winners, commonly with citations-- now also identify repeat winners completely.

I do not expect to cover defunct categories or the other 9 current categories: Public Service (won primarily by newspapers), two photography prizes, and six reporting prizes. --P64 (talk) 00:05, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I rearranged the list of repeat winners in two columns, winners of two prizes for arts and letters (left, complete) and winners of two prizes for journalism (right, incomplete). We have not identified any winner of both a prize for arts and letters and a prize for journalism.

Nelson Harding is the only consecutive repeat winner we have identified (#Multiple winners, above) and I called him the only in the section preface. During the course of this work I deleted all other annotations about timing such as "(two in a four-year period)". I also replaced the word 'for' with a comma in every listing.

The winners of two prizes for journalism (right column) are complete within each of five current categories, namely Commentary[no repeats] Criticism[none] Editorial Cartooning[17] Editorial Writing[none] and Feature Writing[1].

This section is complete within all of those 12 PPrizes whose Pulitzer Prize winners subcategories I completed in December. I haven't worked on PP winners since then and don't anticipate working on the other PPrizes for journalism that now commonly recognize named people --the prizes for reporting (including the old Correspondence prize) and for photography.

--P64 (talk) 21:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

emphasis added now

More accurately: the five journalism prizes listed above and all seven current arts and letters prizes, plus "the Novel" (1918-1947) for which we have categories distinct from "Fiction" (1948–present). Also the Special prizes for arts and letters as opposed to journalism, whose winner biographies are the ' Pages in category "Pulitzer Prize winners" ' under Pulitzer Prize winners. Subject to my clerical error, that is, none of those Special prize winners (now 21) won any other PPrize.

Those same PPrizes are covered in all of our winner biographies (about 700 pages). None is in a Pulitzer category without mention in the body of the article with a reference (in prose, usually, or in a list of awards/honors). Nor do we have any winner biographies (bluelinks) where the Pulitzer coverage is missing.--as of December 2013.

The other PPrizes, which I did not check for people that should be listed on this page as multiple winners, are identically those whose known winner biographies (about 300 pages) may be in a Pulitzer category without coverage in the article, and those whose winner biographies (bluelinks) may be missing from Pulitzer categories.

--P64 (talk) 20:02, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pulitzer Prize. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100415050116/http://theenvelope.latimes.com/la-et-pulitzer-mcnulty-20100413%2C0%2C3224899.story to http://theenvelope.latimes.com/la-et-pulitzer-mcnulty-20100413%2C0%2C3224899.story

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:24, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 November 2022

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: not moved. Per consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 01:27, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pulitzer Prize → Pulitzer Prizes – In line with other multi-category awards (like the Emmy Awards, Tony Awards, Olivier Awards, etc) that have been moved to their plural titles as the main article is not about a single prize but multiple prizes. Notably the Pulitzers official website uses the plural name as well. So does the lead of the article here. oknazevad (talk) 16:01, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – WP pages are to be given the common name for their subject. This plural name is far from commonly used. The Nobel Prize article retains its singular name, while having multiple categories. Applying a plural title for this article would appear to go against the "Naturalness" and "Consistency" characteristics identified in WP:Article titles. —ADavidB 16:29, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let me inquire this: when you speak of common name, are you referring to the prizes as a whole, or to an individual category, such as the Pulitzer Prize for Literature? Because use of the singular for an individual award while using the plural for the awards collectively is the common convention in English. oknazevad (talk) 16:54, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Most references to the prize are singular. There is no nationally televised "Pulitzer Prizes" show in which recipients are announced. When there is need to refer to more than one issuance, it's plural, but again that is not the most common usage. There is an associated Pulitzer Prize Board that selects Pulitzer Prize winners. Britannica's associated entry uses the singular. The official website prepends "The" to the plural version, which is also not commonly used. —ADavidB 18:17, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:SINGULAR and WP:COMMONNAME. You don't really hear this topic being referred to in the plural like you do with the other "awards" examples cited by the nominator. Rreagan007 (talk) 21:49, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above, it's th difference between Nobel Prize and Emmy Awards. It is simply more common to use the singular. A check of some other encyclopedia entries [1] suggests that this trend exists elsewhere. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 21:53, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per User:Rreagan007 and User:Eddie891. JIP | Talk 12:03, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per all of the above. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:31, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.