Talk:Pulitzer Prize/Archive 1

Archive 1

Yearly articles need real introductions

I just created an introduction to the 1975 Pulitzer Prize article, based significantly on contemporary reporting by The New York Times. I'd like to encourage other editors to do the same for other years. You might find it handy to do a site-specific search of the nytimes.com website, as in the search I did to find most of the details I added to the 1975 intro. 66.167.253.209 13:39, 28 September 2006 (UTC).

Independent Board

The intro says that the prize is awarded by an "independent board". Who is that? Who is on it? Are they affiliated with Columbia? It's somethign for someone to figure out. Zweifel 01:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

continued 2012, #"The board" -P64

Pulitzer clean-up

I just noticed that the Pulitzer Prize section is, for the most part, a complete wreck. Nobel Prize could serve as a model for improvements. {{PulitzerPrizes}} could probably use some tweaking, and a different template for the "Pulitzer Prize in XXX" pages could be used. Standardization of lists across these articles would also be good. Is anyone else watching these pages/wishing to pitch in and help? --JayHenry 03:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

It isn't great, but then again it's barely been touched since I rewrote the page about three years ago, and standards have improved vastly in that time. I'd be happy to help improve things, but I'm afraid someone else is going to have to take the lead on this one. Rebecca 05:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, this page is actually in decent shape. My concern is mostly with the Pulitzer "subpages" in Category:Pulitzer Prizes. I'll do some thinking and post some ideas for standardization here. --JayHenry 13:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I whipped up a template {{pulitzer}} on display at right. I wouldn't put it on the main page here, but I think it'd make a really nice addition to the pages on the various prizes. Do people like it or at least the general idea? --JayHenry 20:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I certainly do - that looks superb. However, I fear you're going to have problems with that image. While the user who uploaded it says that it was public domain, this looks like bollocks to me in the absence of any explanation as to why. More likely, it'll be fair use - and that's not something we can use in templates. Rebecca 01:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... you know I looked at that image and it didn't even register that this was probably a bogus tag. Yeah, you're right. Phooey. --JayHenry 02:46, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

The template still looks great, however. I'd have no objection to sticking this in the respective articles today. Rebecca 02:49, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I took the image out, and it still looks nice. Let's do it! --JayHenry 02:56, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

i replaced the image of the gold medal. its copyright is correct as it was designed in 1917, and its designer, Daniel Chester French, died in 1931. --emerson7 | Talk 21:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Would you be able to explain this clearly on the image page? If it's just left with the simple PD tag, it is very likely to be deleted regardless. Rebecca 01:14, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Robert Penn Warren

Wasn't Robert Penn Warren awarded a Pulitzer Prize for both poetry and fiction? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cglied (talk • contribs) 20:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

What's the point of this paragraph?

Can someone justify this paragraph, to me:

"Several of the more famous recipients of the Pulitzer Prize include Ernest Hemingway, Eudora Welty, and Toni Morrison for Fiction; Robert Frost for Poetry; Roger Ebert for Criticism; and Tennessee Williams, Arthur Miller, Rodgers and Hammerstein, and Stephen Sondheim for Drama."

Is it to clarify that "this prize is important"? I don't think that's necessary, and the reason I don't like this paragraph is because it begins with an absurd pretense-- Hemingway, Welty and Morrison are some of the more famous ones to win for Fiction, really? They're certainly famous, but they're not more famous than, oh, say... Faulkner, Steinbeck, Wharton, Cather, Mailer, Updike, Bellow, Roth, McCarthy, Proulx, Cheever. Why point those in particular out? Why list ONLY Robert Frost for poetry, when other winners include W.H. Auden (arguably more acclaimed than Frost), Robert Lowell, William Carlos Williams. Etc. Hm? Hm? Chicopac (talk) 19:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Pulitzer website has changed

The URLs for the year pages on the Pulitzer website have changed; the new form is: http://www.pulitzer.org/awards/1918 -- someone with a bot should go through and fix all the year pages. JesseW, the juggling janitor 21:17, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Entry & Prize Consideration (exposes important info about paying for entry, etc)

I see nothing wrong with this section (everything is perfectly accurate), but somebody axed just about the the entire thing with no explanation, and stuffed what was left at the very, very bottom of the article, on the lowest possible line. This is how it's supposed to be (see below). This is crucially important, and the subject matter (entry and consideration) is worthy to be the the first-listed section - when I first came to this article, I was by far most interested in the facts about entry/consideration/etc (and I'm not a Pulitzer entrant, and will never be), and "History" came a distant second or third, because it isn't a "here and now" thing like how one enters today (and who)

The Pulitzer (pronounced "PULL-it-seh") Prize does not consider all applicable works in the media, but only those that have been entered with a $50 entry fee (one per desired entry category), or any work that is specifically chosen for review by special admission. Entries must also fit in at least one of the specific prize categories, and cannot simply gain entrance on the grounds of having general literary or compositional properties. Works can also only be entered into a maximum of two prize categories, regardless of their properties.

--68.111.167.64 (talk) 01:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Scandals

At least one person—the Washington Post's Janet Cooke—has had to give the prize back. I'm not sure if there are others. Is this worth mentioning somewhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.182.172.229 (talk) 20:26, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Jewish American writers

I was doing a bit of research on Jewish American writers and I found out that quite a few of them had been recipients of the Pulitzer Prize. Is this just a coincidence, or is there a kind of institutional link here, owing to the fact that Pulitzer was himself Jewish ? ADM (talk) 07:46, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Seriously

It is difficult to the Pulitzer prizes seriously. Don't know why for sure. As if a mainstream US literary prize could never entirely escape the pull of the middlebrow? Tsinfandel (talk) 01:40, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

What are the criteria for the award?

This page seems like it should include the judging criteria.

216.168.54.229 (talk) 17:31, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Removed

I removed the following because its nonsensical as well as improper to state "pull it sir" as a pronunciation guide.

"According to the administrators of the Pulitzer Prize the correct pronunciation of the name should sound like the verb pull, as in "Pull it, sir""'

=67.161.54.63 (talk) 10:00, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Major and lesser prizes

I will probably start creating templates for the journalism side by next weekend. I am wondering if any Pulitzer Prizes are considered more major than others. For example in the Grammy Awards there is an award for Grammy Award for Album of the Year. There are also Album of the year awards for numerous specific styles of music. Obviously, winning the Album of the Year is more significant than winning Album of the Year for a specific style of music. I want to understand if any Pulitzers are considered much less significant than others.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:27, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Needs serious editing

Whoever wrote this essay obviously is not a Pulitzer Prize candidate. Why a separate paragraph for his daugher's death? Needs a separate paragraph about his personal life, including marriage and children. Needs other editing as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.39.110.172 (talk) 16:34, 14 January 2012 (UTC)