Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Shaw Prize/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 18:33, 5 December 2009 [1].

Shaw Prize

edit
Nominator(s): —Chris!c/t 05:39, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it's ready. This is my first award list in a while. —Chris!c/t 05:39, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Geraldk

Comments: Did a quick c/e for spelling and grammar issues hope you don't mind, but also had these:

  • "The award currently has three disciplines: Astronomy, Life Science and Medicine as well as Mathematical Sciences" this sentence is confusing - I know you prefer not to use the serial comma but there has to be a way to make it clearer, because at first glance it looks like it lists four prizes.
  • ..."has preference to award individuals whose work was recently achieved in these fields" end of same sentence, not sure what you mean by 'has preference to', or even if you need it. Can't you just say it 'awards individuals...'

Geraldk (talk) 12:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made some fixes. But I am not sure how to fix point 1. I just added additional comma and hope that it helps to clear things up.—Chris!c/t 19:53, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Jan Kameníček

Comments. Generally, I like the list, and have just a few comments:

  • I think the tables should be sortable.
IMO, this is not that helpful since the only things can be sorted are names and nationalities.—Chris!c/t 23:34, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And by years: Some people prefer them ascending and others descending. Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 13:59, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done—Chris!c/t 23:57, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All the available images are here already.—Chris!c/t 23:34, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And what about this one and this one? Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 13:59, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I did search for them; missed these two apparently.—Chris!c/t 07:01, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done—Chris!c/t 23:57, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking about the article a little more and have a few more questions:

  • What is the nomination process? Who can nominate?
  • Where does the ceremony take place?
  • Where does the foundation take so much money?
  • There is a picture of a medal, but the main text does not say that the winners get any medal. Is it possible to describe its design, especially as there is no picture of the reverse? Is the man on the obverse Shaw? Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 23:26, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I added some more info.—Chris!c/t 01:22, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I still think there could be more about the medal (some info is here).
I am missing also the place of the ceremony, but I do not know, whether any regular place is given. However, the prize is definitely connected with Hong Kong and this should be stated in the text somewhere (the fact that the Shaw Prize Foundation is based in Hong Kong could be mentioned at least). Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 15:57, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Added a sentence about the medal and that the prize was established in Hong Kong.—Chris!c/t 23:17, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"... and a seal of Chinese characters" – this could be more specific. I suggest to write something like "...and Chinese language quotation of philosopher Xun Zi, meaning "Grasp the law of nature and make use of it". Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 23:35, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Added—Chris!c/t 19:23, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. The only unresolved issue is the sources of the money, but this might be impossible to find out and so I do not insist on it. Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 20:03, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 15:46, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  • "widely regarded" then just a single reference. Done
  • Why do we need to know Run Run Shaw's year of birth? Done
  • I don't think the fields need to be capitalised, e.g. Astronomy should just be astronomy.. Done
  • "prize as of 2009 was" commas after prize and 2009. Done
  • "is Canadian " was? Done
  • What are "prize 1" and "prize 2"? Is it explained somewhere? Kind of explained in the note; not clear exactly why two prizes were given
  • "Since the first prize was awarded in 2004, no women have been recipients." - "... awarded in 2004, there have been no female recipients."? Done
  • Are the rationales copyvios? We've gone over this a few times before, I'm not convinced we came to a conclusion. A reword would the safest option. Done
  • Brit Eng or US Eng for this article? Could you list them out? I am not good at catching these.
  • Refs should preferably be in numerical order. And shouldn't the column be Refs not Ref.? Done
  • Perimutter et al caption needs a full stop. Fixed
  • Why is Mumford image narrower than the others? Not sure why
  • Poor old Coleman, all redlinky... Done

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:58, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • "work was recently achieved" what do you mean by this?
rephrased following Bencherlite's suggestion—Chris!c/t 19:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In addition, the winner receives a sum of money. The monetary value, as of 2009, is US$1 million." merge these.
Done—Chris!c/t 19:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are "prize 1" and "prize 2" the official names? Still not clear.
There is no official name on this, but two prizes were given. Any suggestion on how to reword this—Chris!c/t 19:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a process that advances our knowledge " still very "quotey" - if you're avoiding the copyvio, we should rephrase into third person.
Trying to fix. Does it work—Chris!c/t 19:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 15:46, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Bencherlite
Comments from Bencherlite
  • "The prize awards individuals whose work was recently achieved in the fields of astronomy, life science and medicine, and mathematical sciences; as such, those who have decreased are ineligible." How about: "The prize is for recent achievements in the fields of astronomy, life science and medicine, and mathematical sciences; it is not awarded posthumously." (Definitely changed "decreased"!)
  • "Nominations are submitted by invited individuals beginning each year in September" Do I understand this to mean that individuals can nominate themselves, or that people are invited to nominate others?
Yes, people are invited to nominate others—Chris!c/t 19:32, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As of 2009, 19 prizes were awarded to 31 individuals." How about "As of 2009, 19 prizes have been awarded to 31 individuals"?
  • "British Richard Doll" ought to be "British physiologist", or "British (something else)", since "British (name)" doesn't work
  • In the tables, "for proving the Fermat's Last Theorem" shouldn't have the "the" in there; if you want to separate the wikilinks, try "for his [proof] of [Fermat's Last Theorem]"
  • Any particular reason why Coleman isn't linked in the lead?
  • I made some minor changes to the alt-text, including changing "pants" into "trousers" as you appear to be going for British English ("pants" in BritEng means "underpants"...)

Otherwise, looks in good shape. BencherliteTalk 23:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done all. Also thanks for the alt-text fix. I used American Eng, so I had a hard time writing in Brit Eng.—Chris!c/t 19:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, issues resolved (I reworded prize 1 and prize 2 as "one of the prizes" and "the other"). BencherliteTalk 08:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Shaw_Prize/archive1&oldid=1140201750"