Template talk:Nobel Prizes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] chronology and footer

whats the logic in making it a footer? is it policy? Jay 08:37, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

What's the logic behind a "series"? Nobel prizes do not follow any chronological order so there's no point in forcing it. There is also no intimate connection among the individual nobel prizes - only in relation to all nobel prizes as a whole. The footer keeps the listing out of the way. --Jiang 20:17, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I don't understand, what have these series boxes got to do with chronological order ? The boxes are meant only for listing similar articles in a particular series, isn't it. Jay 08:37, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Listing similar articles in a grouping is what footers are for. What's wrong with the footer? What's better about a series? --Jiang

[edit] Bank of Sweden Prize in Economics

"Bank of Sweden Prize in Economics" already makes it clear that's it's not a ordinary nobel prize. Calling it "non-nobel prize" goes against common usage and is unncessary.--Jiang 09:04, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The prize is not a part of Nobel's bequest and that qualifier should not be lost. Whether in may or may not be called a "Nobel Prize" can be discussed, but to call it a "non-nobel prize" promotes a faulty, or even false image. Grouping the prizes on the lines of bequest is only one of the possible divisions. The division between the scientific prizes on one side and the literature and peace prizes on the other likely even more important. The fact that it is awarded in Stockholm also places it in the main category of prizes, as opposed to the peace prize which may not be awarded within the borders of Sweden. -- Mic 19:27, May 3, 2004 (UTC)