Talk:List of Pulitzer Prizes awarded to The New York Times

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Pulitzer Prizes awarded to The New York Times. 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/20070927081606/http://www.nytco.com/company/awards/statement.html to http://www.nytco.com/company/awards/statement.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:33, 19 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Just for the record, I was able to rescue this source! Simple searching was all that was needed. —Shrinkydinks (talk) 17:39, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

NPOV issues
The article contains numerous NPOV issues. There is excessive use of overly positive quotations and language that is Wikipuffery. There is also a serious lack of sources. Kind regards, Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 21:40, 24 April 2021 (UTC)


 * thank you so much for tagging this article! Agree on all counts. I stumbled across this article by chance and figured some of these sources would be low-hanging fruit so I'm adding some. As I'm going through the official Pulitzer Prize announcement pages, it seems a lot of the puffery may be unattributed quotations from the prize announcements. I'll see what I can do to remove excess detail, attribute any quotes worth keeping, and re-balance for better NPOV as I go along... —Shrinkydinks (talk) 17:38, 3 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I suspect the word "distinguished" can likely be removed throughout, replaced instead with the category names as proper nouns. This should help considerably (along with removal or citation of presently unattributed quotes). —Shrinkydinks (talk) 19:12, 3 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Another thing that would help: Reporting from the time when each award was issued, ideally not from The New York Times itself. Right now I'm adding sources to the official organization, but reporting by a different newspaper, from the time the award was granted, might lend high quality perspective to the merit of the recipient and the quality of the work commended. —Shrinkydinks (talk) 19:16, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Organization: Multiple lines or just one line per year?
Wanted to proactively open a discussion on this topic. It seems for years pre-2018, the article is organized into one bullet point per year, with multiple awards in the same year separated by semicolons. More recently, editors have added unique bullet points for each award won. We should have a standard formatting choice for the whole article.


 * One bullet point per year; multiple prizes separated by semicolons: Pros: This has a nice, clean appearance, with a blue-linked year at the start of each bullet point for the year's Pulitzer Prizes as a whole. Cons: It's hard to parse the longer lists separated by semicolons—those get lost in the prose.
 * Each prize gets its own bullet point; multiple bullet points per year as necessary: Pros: The article title is "List of Pulitzer Prizes awarded to The New York Times", after all, not "List of Pulitzer Prizes awarded to The New York Times by year". If the lede says they've won 130 awards, I'm expecting to see 130 bullet points, or at least I'm hoping to easily identify the awards on first glance—this is highly readable. Cons: A little bit messier in appearance.

A table would effectively straddle both options and might be the most effective solution to this problem, but alas, this is the "List of..." not the "Table of Pulitzer Prizes awarded to..." (unless another editor could provide guidance here, or perhaps examples of other lists?) —Shrinkydinks (talk) 17:46, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Standardization question...
Some award list entries include the named individual's title/profession, eg. "1978: Henry Kamm, chief Asian diplomatic correspondent, in International Reporting, for..." whereas others just get right to the award, eg. "1974: Hedrick Smith, in International Reporting, for..."

Which one would be be better? Should we...
 * 1) Standardize: Include every person's title—it's useful context
 * 2) Standardize: Include nobody's title—they're all blue linked anyways, it's unnecessary detail that distracts from the main content of the list
 * 3) Include title on an as-needed basis

I'm leaning toward #2 or #3, but I'm not sure what the basis would be for including someone's title? —Shrinkydinks (talk) 20:16, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Next steps as of June 3, 2021
Having now gone through the entire text of the article, having standardized the whole article os that each prize receives its own bullet point (and having found an award from 2002 that was previously missing from our list!), here's what needs to happen next:


 * 1) Add citations to 1990–2021
 * 2) Somehow find the last two prizes (only 128 entries in a list that claims to have 130 items)
 * 3) update: Found an out-of-place prize that in 1955 that duplicated a real one from 1951. Now there are only ~127 prizes identified of a claimed 130 —Shrinkydinks (talk) 23:51, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 4) Reduce and nearly eliminate the list's reliance on unattributed, emotional, NPOV-violating direct quotes from the Pulitzer Prize Board prize announcements. These are the source of almost all of the supporting prose/context for prizes from 1990–2021.
 * 5) Add blue links to relevant events 1990–2021
 * 6) See if we can find reliable, third party coverage of literally any of this article. Currently almost the entire thing is sourced to The Pulitzer Prize organization or The New York Times itself. Both are obviously credible sources but given they are both the subject of this article we should endeavor to find other reporting on these prizes wherever we can.

This is my current view! —Shrinkydinks (talk) 04:58, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * thanks very much for your work. I'm very busy at the moment so I have been editing infrequently. I will try and get round to cleaning up the article at some point. Kind regards, Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 15:16, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

This page is missing data from 2022
Hello Shrinkydinks

I'm a representative of The Times so not making any edits directly. As of January 2023, The New York Times has won 135 since the awards were first presented in 1917.

https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/miami-herald-wins-pulitzer-coverage-condominium-collapse-2022-05-09/

Below are details on the prizes awarded in 2022.

The Times took one for national reporting for its coverage of fatal traffic stops by police; another for international reporting for its examination of the failures of the U.S. air war in the Middle East; and a third for criticism for Salamishah Tillet, a contributing critic at large, for her writing on race in arts and culture.

https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/staff-new-york-times-1

https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/staff-new-york-times-notably-azmat-khan-contributing-writer

https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/salamishah-tillet-contributing-critic-large-new-york-times

In addition, New York Times reporter Andrea Elliott won a Pulitzer Prize in the general nonfiction category for her book "Invisible Child: Poverty, Survival and Hope in an American City," which started with a 2013 series published by the newspaper.

https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/andrea-elliott-0

170.149.100.5 (talk) 19:00, 25 January 2023 (UTC)