The Golgi case seems dubious. Golgi was wrong about the nervous system being continuous, but he did masses of other pioneering work in neurobiology and cell biology. He discovered the Golgi apparatus, which continues to baffle undergraduates to this day. He developed the staining technique which Ramón y Cajal eventually used to prove him wrong! I don't think the Nobel was given specifically for the idea that he nervous system is continuous, so it seems justified even today.
But they also awarded it to two researchers proposing opposite interpretations, so they obviously did not endorse his interpretation of a continuous nervous system.
Insofar as the committee endorses specific discoveries (Nobel's criterion was for conferring the greatest benefit on mankind), it notably did not endorse relativity in awarding the 1921 prize to Einstein, either. It has been argued that this was due to the indirect influence of Henri Bergson's philosophical- and intuition-based objections.
Yes, and he did loads of work on the structure of the nervous system, including developing techniques, which is an inseperable part of scientific research, which was entirely valid.
