Talk:Nobel Prize

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nobel 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, 2, 3, 4, 5: 90 days

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Nobel Prize has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 5, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed
October 20, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed
February 15, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed
February 27, 2010	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
April 3, 2010	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
April 14, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
May 30, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
July 2, 2010	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 10, 2004, December 10, 2005, December 10, 2006, December 10, 2007, December 10, 2008, December 10, 2009, December 10, 2013, and December 10, 2023.
Current status: Good article

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.

Norway

	Norway portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway 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.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Sweden Top‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles 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.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

History of Science Top‑importance

	History of science portal This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was reviewed by Nature (journal) on December 14, 2005.
Comments: It was found to have 5 errors.
For more information about external reviews of Wikipedia articles and about this review in particular, see this page.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

On 1 December 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to Nobel Prizes. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Semi-protected edit request on 9 September 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Use British spelling of the words characterize and organization. 90.228.239.139 (talk) 23:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Pinchme123 (talk) 03:15, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Inventing controversey

There's a section pointing out the discrepancy in figures for awards to men as opposed to awards for women, and then notes a perfectly legitimate reason - that there's more men in theese fields So then how is it controversial?

The sentence "reflecting a time when gender bias in the relevant fields was greater" well what is this 'gender bias'? How has it significantly lessened?

21:42, 10 December 2023 (UTC) Montalban (talk) 21:42, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"the interest on which is to be distributed annually as prizes"

Since most of the money from the Nobel foundation seems to be going to the partying - isn't somebody else supposed to pay for that if the will states "the interest on which is to be distributed annually as prizes"? 151.40.125.129 (talk) 07:06, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which scientist won most noble prize in history

give me reply 110.39.161.138 (talk) 15:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

suspect notable experience in his life

Why does the "history" part of the article put so much emphasis on that he found an obituary of himself in the newspaper? This feels odd that 40% of the section talks about this. 132.147.140.229 (talk) 14:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]