Featured listPritzker Architecture Prize is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured list on February 18, 2019.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 11, 2009Featured list candidatePromoted
In the newsNews items involving this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on March 28, 2011, and March 6, 2019.

Comment edit

There are three versions of this page under different names. Can someone merge all the various names? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.227.19.34 (talkcontribs) 25 September 2005‎

Consistancy edit

If your goin to list the lifespan of any architect in the awardees list you should list all of them with blanks for living recipeants John Smith Sr (1897-1985), John Smith Jr (1927- ) --Lemmey (talk) 20:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Country edit

I'm not familiar with the Wiki standard for which country is supposed to be listed next to a person, like in this list. Is it the birth country or current country of residence? Just curious, because I know Gehry lives in US but was born in Canada. Wikidsoup [talk] 20:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Shouldn't [Ieoh Ming Pei] also have the Chinese flag? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.28.127.81 (talk) 19:53, 28 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Youngest Pritzker Winner edit

I am fairly certain that Richard Meier was 49 at the time of his being awarded the prize. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.64.104.89 (talk) 05:08, 24 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Seems to be true according to this source. He's born October 12 while Portzamparc is born May 5, so if the announcement/ceremony was about the same time of the year than Meier was younger when receiving the prize. --Elekhh (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Number of awards by country edit

A section counting the number of awards by country has been recently added to the article. I doubt this has any educational value. First of all, the prize is awarded based on individual merit, and is independent from the country of origin, country of residence or country of practice of the laureate. Second, there is no objective basis for assigning an architect to a country when his/her country of origin differs from the country of residence and practice. Third, the Hyatt Foundation is based in the US, and in the first 6 years had an obvious North American focus. The section IMO reads like a trivia, has no relevance, and therefore should be removed. Elekhh (talk) 10:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I am not sure why you dislike the table. It is only for an informational purpose. If the prize is awarded based on individual and there is no objective basis for assigning an architect to a country, then why don't you remove the "Nationarity" in the table? That said, if anyone other than you votes for deletion, I will not object to the removal. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 11:58, 29 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
I actually find the nationality column with the flags also somewhat distracting (see MOS:FLAG), however at least it provides some background information about each individual. Adding up the countries is what I find irrelevant, and it makes the Prize appear like a sports-trophy. Also, if you visit the official Pritzker website you'll see there is no such emphasis on nationality. -Elekhh (talk) 22:16, 29 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
As an editor who helped get this to featured list status, I'd have to agree with Elekhh's assessment of the summary table. On an individual basis, it is interesting to note the nationality of the various winners, but it seems irrelevant to add up the "national" wins... The Rambling Man (talk) 07:18, 30 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

File:Satelitski kuli, Meksiko.jpg Nominated for Deletion edit

  An image used in this article, File:Satelitski kuli, Meksiko.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 06:16, 18 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

File:21st Century Museum of Contemporary Museum.jpg Nominated for Deletion edit

  An image used in this article, File:21st Century Museum of Contemporary Museum.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:21st Century Museum of Contemporary Museum.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:29, 1 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

File:St. Mary's Cathedral Tokyo.jpg Nominated for Deletion edit

  An image used in this article, File:St. Mary's Cathedral Tokyo.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:St. Mary's Cathedral Tokyo.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:31, 1 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that the photo next to Gordon Bunshaft is actually Oscar Niemeyer's. I don't how to fix that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.4.84.64 (talk) 13:10, 18 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Location edit

In adding the announced location of the ceremony, I followed the format of the last two years, including the city but I notice now that it was not done that way previously. A very few have the city in the name of the location, but most don't. I propose adding the city to the rest for both readers info and consistency. Alanscottwalker (talk) 10:52, 26 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Makes sense to me. --ELEKHHT 11:49, 26 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

No longer a list edit

The 'controversy' section that has been moved around top to bottom suggests to me that this is now an article with an embedded list. That being the case, we should probably further break up the introduction into article sections and instead have a WP:Lead. Alanscottwalker (talk) 12:27, 6 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

I agree, it shouldn't be a list-class article anyway. -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 15:25, 6 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
Feel free to write an article about the prize itself then, the majority of the article is a list. Until there's enough to break out into its own article, it should remain a list. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:40, 6 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
I don't see how that's supposed to make any sense. -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 09:03, 7 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
Like Baileys Women's Prize for Fiction and List of Baileys Women's Prize for Fiction winners. You can move the existing article to "List of Prizter Architecture Prize winners", trim the lead a little, remove the controversy section, and re-create an article with the title "Pritzker Architecture Prize" where you can add more detail to your heart's content, and simply link out to the winners' list. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:14, 7 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
I do not see how that really makes sense either, as it seems duplicative. We could do that but per WP:List, we can also embed the list in the article. Alanscottwalker (talk) 11:40, 7 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
Yes, it was indeed duplicative but it was insisted upon by another editor. But all this is moot. The article is an article whether it's a list or not. The predominant feature of the article is a list of winners. Until that becomes anything different, I can't see the issue here. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:45, 7 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
Well, it looks like a cluttered mess now, so hopefully you're both pleased with the result. I used to be pleased and proud of the list, it was featured on the main page a few times. But I'll take it off my watchlist as this arbitrary and unilateral carving up has done it no end of bad. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:18, 7 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
Agree with The Rambling Man that changes in the past 24 hours were not an improvement. I prefer this version. In the current version the section title "Prize" makes little sense and neither does it make sense to have each paragraph in a separate section. --ELEKHHT 14:33, 7 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Article and category name edit

Note that there is a discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 March 29#Category:Driehaus Prize winners about renaming Category:Pritzker Prize winners to Category:Pritzker Architecture Prize winners for consistency with the current article name. The name of the article was changed in 2011 from the shorter "Pritzker Prize" (PP) to the current "Pritzker Architecture Prize" (PAP) for consistency with the official name. Looking at the five criteria for determining Wikipedia:Article titles, there are arguments for both forms: the PAP is more precise, while PP is more concise. Currently PP is the more commonly used name, more google search results both for simple web pages and books. Looking at media reports about this year's prize winner, Pritzker Prize is more common (CNN, ArchDaily, Guardian, LA Times, etc.). Should the article be renamed to the more common and shorter form? Also please comment at the CfD linked above. --ELEKHHT 23:58, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

I think "Architecture" should remain within the article's name. We're facing a jungle of prizes, ceremonies, events etc. across the web for various things. If an article name says what it's all about and it does it in such a compact way, we should be glad that's even possible. -- Cheers Horst-schlaemma (talk) 11:50, 9 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Meaning of table column Example Work edit

A suggestion based on this article for Nobel prize in Literature showed that the meaning of table label "Example Work" was not clearly read as meaning 'the thing cited in the award announcement'. I think it would be better to change that to 'Cited work' or something -- anyone have a better label ? Markbassett (talk) 22:34, 9 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

Photo section edit

I don't really get what kind of rules or regulations have been broken by adding photos of some laureates from wikimedia commons. The quote "no fair use rationale for inclusion of this image in this specific article" would need some clarification.. Vasarchit

See WP:FUR. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:55, 5 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified (February 2018) edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Pritzker Architecture 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 14:44, 10 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:56, 5 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:39, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply