Talk:Nobel Peace Prize

Heading

It is clear that there is significantly too much focus on Maria Machado. Since I have been told to come here, I am. There is an entire paragraph in the heading dedicated solely to criticizing her nomination. This is not "2025 Nobel Peace Prize," this is "Nobel Peace Prize." Only throwing in an incredibly lengthy heading criticizing one person is borderline slander and certainly not fitting for an encyclopedia. Adding to that, there are numerous issues with the way it is written:

• The first sentence mentions the numerous controversies associated with the award before moving directly into the current recipient, a clear violation of WP:Synth.
• The controversies section, which is not even replicated on "Nobel Prize controversies," cites one Iranian state news agency, one Turkish state news agency, and an Indian news source of questionable reliability. Aside from NDTV, most of these do not pass muster.
• Even if all sources were legitimate, there is the issue of the wildly overstuffed heading.

BobSmithME (talk) 06:21, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

In addition to the questionable choice of sources, the exclusive page about her and the 2025 Nobel Prize does not mention any of this IMPTRON (talk) 16:22, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

A reminder that IPs and non-extended confirmed accounts are not permitted to make edits to any article or page related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. (WP:ARBPIA) 331dot (talk) 20:17, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@331dot This is the talk page, though, not the page itself, and moreover, the only relation of this page to said conflict is that some people who have won the prize have talked about it. I'm also a bit disappointed that you have decided to delete my suggestions and not implement any of the changes. 38.158.191.113 (talk) 20:21, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@331dot Including the fact that I provided better sourcing (by Wikipedia's own standards) for some of the things you edited in, which would actually help you, if anything. 38.158.191.113 (talk) 20:23, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

The restrictions mean you may not edit any article or page on Wikipedia related to the topic without an extended confirmed account. See your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 21:02, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@331dot Yes, but the talk page for the article "Nobel Peace Prize" isn't related to it anymore than the talk page for "Marco Rubio" is. 38.158.191.113 (talk) 21:10, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@331dot Also, forgive me, but there is a post on this talk page from an anonymous IP that mentions the conflict without, unlike mine, making any productive editing suggestions for this (very much non-conflict-related) article (in fact, it just makes a ex post facto recommendation for the Nobel committee) and has been up for 8 days. If that post has not been deleted, perhaps it is because people do not see this article as being related to the conflict. 38.158.191.113 (talk) 21:14, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

The restrictions apply to any type of page on Wikipedia. Articles, talk pages, user talk pages, anything. The only thing you can do is make wholly uncontroversial edit requests that do not require discussion. You don't have to believe me, go look for yourself, but if you persist, I will impose sanctions.

If a post got past us, sorry, but I'm dealing with what's in front of me. 331dot (talk) 21:16, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

This is the page for the Nobel Peace Prize, not the Arab-Israeli conflict. I have failed to find any kind of warning, category, or mention of this being part of that, and nowhere in WP:ARBPIA does it state editors cannot dispute formatting on wholly unrelated pages just because a sentence is part of something that only marginally relates to that conflict. BobSmithME (talk) 08:08, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

I have now formally notified you of the restrictions(you too are not extended confirmed). They apply to any type of page anywhere on Wikipedia, and are interpreted broadly- no matter how small the connection is to the topic, the restrictions apply. The most common topics have notifications and are often protected, but the lack of such doesn't mean edits are permitted. This topic has touched on the current Laureate's views on events related to the Arab-Israeli conflict and relationship with the Israeli Prime Minister, both of which clearly falls within the topic area. 331dot (talk) 08:22, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Undone Edit

I added this:

In January 2026 US president Donald J. Trump announced that the 2025 prize holder Machado would consider sharing the prize with him . The Nobel committee commented on their website: "The facts are clear and well established. Once a Nobel Prize is announced, it cannot be revoked, shared, or transferred to others. The decision is final and stands for all time." 
   
The FAQ goes in more detail why, "According to the Statutes of the Nobel Foundation, § 10, “No appeals may be made against the decision of a prize-awarding body with regard to the award of a prize”" and concludes "A Nobel Prize can neither be revoked, shared, nor transferred to others. Once the announcement has been made, the decision stands for all time". 

Why was it removed?

-- ~2026-26551-1 (talk) 05:07, 13 January 2026 (UTC) ~2026-26551-1 (talk) 05:07, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

The circumstances are already mentioned in 2025 Nobel Peace Prize, this article is about the prize in general. Wilk10 (talk) 07:31, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I guess the "it's not shareable" remark counts for every nobel peace prize issued, not just for the 2025 prize. Therefor it makes more sense to keep it here. I would not go to search one particular prize, and definitly all the prices of all years, for that information. I would try to look it up right here, in the main article. And that's fact what I've done, when I heard in the local news about passing the prize down to another person, I wondered if that's possible at all. So I looked for information on wp, could not find it, researched a bit further and added my findings. It belongs here in the main article. ~2026-26551-1 (talk) 08:31, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

This is an event related to the 2025 prize only. If we give WP:Weight to all the "trivia" that happened to each prize throughout its 124 years of history the main article would become an unreadable mess. Readers know that this is something related to the 2025 edition only and the link to it is easy to find in the infobox. Wilk10 (talk) 08:40, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

How should readers now? It came up this year. But how will people know ten years from now thats been 2025 and not 2021 and not 2027? ~2026-26551-1 (talk) 11:18, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:Recentism. This news is not relevant for the main article now nor in 10 years. It belongs to the 2025 article. We shouldn't add irrelevant information to main articles, to simplify one-off cases of research and in the process making pages unreadable for everyone. Wilk10 (talk) 11:32, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

If the prize is shareable, transferable or revocable is relevant, today as and as in ten years time. Therefor, even when it was an recent event that triggered my curiosity, but it does not make it an less relevant issue in other times as well. The §10 cited from the nobel committees press office is also not an recent addition but the usual rules the prize has attached to. ~2026-26551-1 (talk) 13:49, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Wilk10 I agree the full edit shouldn't be there for afformentioned reasons, however a single sentence clarifying that the prize is not shareable or delegatable with a reference to the statement would be reasonable. It's not necessary to include the current events in the edit, just the specific rule. Primetime42 (talk) 00:15, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

But where do you fit it on the page? It sounds like a technicality to me.

It is definitely relevant in the 2025 context, of course. Wilk10 (talk) 09:19, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

some photos not displaying in enlarged view mode

The last four photos do not display in enlargement mode. Instead there is a message "Sorry the file cannot be displayed. There appears to be a technical issue ..." Often the complete image is displayed for fraction of a second before the error message replaces it. The original images display OK in the article itself. I have noticed this issue occurring in quite a few article over the last 6 months or so. ~2026-67326-0 (talk) 04:51, 31 January 2026 (UTC)