::{{ping|Naraht}} Sure! Here’s the one from 2025: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jiten_D/sandbox&diff=prev&oldid=1327343801 sandbox edit link]. Certainly more parseable. The idea is that the location of the ceremony, or trivia related to that year will be in the section space, whilst any trivia related to a specific award (like potentially notable media coverage or context of the award) can go into footnotes. I can start incorporating these changes onto the main space, working backwards through the years. [[User:Jiten D|<span style=”color:#0b6e25″>Jiten</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Jiten D|<span style=”color:#e71d1d”> talk </span>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contribs/Jiten D|<span style=”color:#0017ff”>contribs</span>]]</sub> 23:22, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
::{{ping|Naraht}} Sure! Here’s the one from 2025: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jiten_D/sandbox&diff=prev&oldid=1327343801 sandbox edit link]. Certainly more parseable. The idea is that the location of the ceremony, or trivia related to that year will be in the section space, whilst any trivia related to a specific award (like potentially notable media coverage or context of the award) can go into footnotes. I can start incorporating these changes onto the main space, working backwards through the years. [[User:Jiten D|<span style=”color:#0b6e25″>Jiten</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Jiten D|<span style=”color:#e71d1d”> talk </span>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contribs/Jiten D|<span style=”color:#0017ff”>contribs</span>]]</sub> 23:22, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
:::As you said, the question is whether to keep all years in one table each, or one large to sort by subject. I’m leaning toward the “each” as subject is not as important as in the Nobels. I’d appreciate other voices here.[[User:Naraht|Naraht]] ([[User talk:Naraht|talk]]) 03:24, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
:::As you said, the question is whether to keep all years in one table each, or one large to sort by subject. I’m leaning toward the “each” as subject is not as important as in the Nobels. I’d appreciate other voices here.[[User:Naraht|Naraht]] ([[User talk:Naraht|talk]]) 03:24, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Naraht}} Agreed! There also isn’t a fixed set of subjects so stand-alone tables seem all the more suitable. And in principle, merging years later on (if there is consensus) shouldn’t be too difficult. Happy to hear other people’s thoughts. [[User:Jiten D|<span style=”color:#0b6e25″>Jiten</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Jiten D|<span style=”color:#e71d1d”> talk </span>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contribs/Jiten D|<span style=”color:#0017ff”>contribs</span>]]</sub> 09:07, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
 |
This article contains broken links to one or more target anchors:
The anchors may have been removed, renamed, or are no longer valid. Please fix them by following the link above, checking the page history of the target pages, or updating the links. Remove this template after the problem is fixed | Report an error |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Ig Nobel Prize winners. 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: 5 June 2024).
- 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) 15:46, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Ig Nobel Prize winners. 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: 5 June 2024).
- 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) 14:06, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
The description of the 2009 award for the ‘Prawo Jazdy’ confusion links to a “Confusion with Irish driving licences” section on the Driving licence in Poland page, but no such section exists. Either a section describing this subject should be added to that page, or the link should be changed to something that actually describes what the link is meant to refer to. – 73.195.249.93 (talk) 20:54, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- It looks like that section was removed a few weeks ago by @E-960. —Pokechu22 (talk) 20:58, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Was reading through this and I noticed the absolutely MASSIVE paragraph under the 2004 Ig Nobel Prize in Biology. Not only does the paragraph look seriously out of place, but in my opinion, its content is only vaguely related at best. I’ve considered removing the paragraph, but I haven’t yet, because it does contain some related information that could be written into the actual Ig Nobel Prize entry.
If anyone smarter than me wants to go ahead and do this, feel free.
B-1700 (talk) 19:54, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
why are the award topics all bolded? that doesn’t fit with wikipedia style at all 172.254.184.58 (talk) 17:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
Hi all! I’m keen to revamp this list into something that can be considered for WP:FLC — that would include major structural changes, copy editing, proper referencing for all the research awarded, etc. etc. Dropping this message here to invite any and all comments on improvements/suggestions for how the list should look. As a first step, I’ve converted the list of 1991 laureates into a table in my sandbox (ignore the lack of references for now). I think it looks cleaner this way, and exactly quotes what the award is for (as we do for, say, List of Nobel laureates in Physics). The only question is if each year should have its own unsortable table, or if there should be a table for all years (so one can in principle sort by subject).
Tagging a few recent/prominent editors on the page history for opinions: Naraht, Borgenland, Dancing Hippos, Headbomb, Cl3phact0, BorgQueen, Crunchydillpickle. Feel free to ignore the ping if you’re uninterested! 🙂
Jiten talk contribs 19:40, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- At minimum, I’d like to see your ideas on a later year (after 2010(?)) when all or most of the honorees receive their awards for legitimate scientific work.Naraht (talk) 20:05, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Naraht: Sure! Here’s the one from 2025: sandbox edit link. Certainly more parseable. The idea is that the location of the ceremony, or trivia related to that year will be in the section space, whilst any trivia related to a specific award (like potentially notable media coverage or context of the award) can go into footnotes. I can start incorporating these changes onto the main space, working backwards through the years. Jiten talk contribs 23:22, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- As you said, the question is whether to keep all years in one table each, or one large to sort by subject. I’m leaning toward the “each” as subject is not as important as in the Nobels. I’d appreciate other voices here.Naraht (talk) 03:24, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Naraht: Agreed! There also isn’t a fixed set of subjects so stand-alone tables seem all the more suitable. And in principle, merging years later on (if there is consensus) shouldn’t be too difficult. Happy to hear other people’s thoughts. Jiten talk contribs 09:07, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- As you said, the question is whether to keep all years in one table each, or one large to sort by subject. I’m leaning toward the “each” as subject is not as important as in the Nobels. I’d appreciate other voices here.Naraht (talk) 03:24, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Naraht: Sure! Here’s the one from 2025: sandbox edit link. Certainly more parseable. The idea is that the location of the ceremony, or trivia related to that year will be in the section space, whilst any trivia related to a specific award (like potentially notable media coverage or context of the award) can go into footnotes. I can start incorporating these changes onto the main space, working backwards through the years. Jiten talk contribs 23:22, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
