Talk:Fields Medal

Archives (Index)

1

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Yau's nationality

@Koh1989: Your repeated removal of the endnote and link to China isn’t justified. Per the New York Times:

In a speech he said that when he won the Fields Medal, "I held no passport of any country and should certainly be considered Chinese."
— Overbye, Dennis (October 17, 2006). "The Emperor of Math". New York Times . Retrieved September 18, 2020.

You are conflating holding a passport with nationality, which is also not the same as citizenship. Yau was born in mainland China and clearly stated that he was Chinese when he was awarded the Fields Medal. Not having a passport doesnt negate that and also doesn’t mean that he had no nationality (or even no citizenship), unless you apply significant WP:SYNTH/WP:OR assumptions.

That’s also what the endnote clearly explained and why there was a slash China/None. — MarkH₂₁^talk 05:14, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Yau's own unfounded claims do not make him Chinese. Nationality must be based on the law. Although nationality and citizenship are not exactly the same, citizenship is usually a legal nationality.

Stephen Hawking invited me to discuss [the proof] with him at Cambridge University in late August 1978. I gladly accepted.... Travel was difficult, however, because the British Consulate had recently taken my Hong Kong resident card, maintaining that I could not keep it now that I had a U.S. green card. In the process, I had become stateless. I was no longer a citizen of any country.... until I became a U.S. citizen in 1990.

So from 1978 to 1990, he had only permanent residency in the US, did the work at American universities, and at the time of being awarded the Fields Medal, US residency was the only legal status he held. Koh1989 (talk) 05:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Nationality and citizenship are both legal terms that are distinct from each other. In the Sino-British Joint Declaration for instance,

Under the Nationality Law of the People's Republic of China, all Hong Kong Chinese compatriots, whether they are holders of the 'British Dependent Territories Citizens' Passport' or not, are Chinese nationals.
— "The Joint Declaration - Memoranda (Exchanged Between the Two Sides)". Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Many residents of the SARs (Hong Kong and Macau) do not have full Chinese citizenship rights despite being Chinese nationals though.

Yeah, I added that quote about his loss of Hong Kong residency to the article Shing-tung Yau. You're trying to use his own statement about his citizenship to negate his own statement about him being Chinese when he won the Fields Medal; Yau's statement that he did not have citizenship does not negate his own statement that he was Chinese when he was awarded the Field Medal. — MarkH₂₁^talk 05:41, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

At the time of 1982, Hong Kong was not returned to the People's Republic of China. China's claim has no international legal basis. If you tell Taiwanese that they are Chinese under the Chinese nationality law, they will be angry. Koh1989 (talk) 05:46, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I don't know if you realize, but the Sino-British Joint Declaration occurred in 1984 before the handover of Hong Kong, with that part a clarification for the current Chinese nationality law that was enacted in 1980. Plus, Hong Kong is not the same as Taiwan (although residents of Taiwan are PRC nationals just as residents of mainland China are legally ROC nationals; this is a well-known fact in the nationality law of both the PRC and ROC that you can find in dozens of reliable sources). — MarkH₂₁^talk 05:51, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

The Chinese government's claim that Hong Kongers are Chinese in the Sino-British Joint Declaration was a one sided argument by the Chinese government, but there is no evidence that the British government agreed to recognize Hong Kongers as Chinese prior to returning Hong Kong to China. And Yau won the Fields Medal before the Sino-British Joint Declaration. Koh1989 (talk) 06:04, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

It was from the joint declaration by both governments. The Chinese nationality law is also from before Yau won the Fields Medal. — MarkH₂₁^talk 06:06, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

The Chinese Nationality Law is not internationally recognized because it contains China's expansionist ideology and China's unilateral claim to sovereignty in Taiwan. If there is a conflict between Chinese nationality law and international law, Wikipedia should prioritize international law over Chinese nationality law. Koh1989 (talk) 06:11, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Nationality laws are within the confines of each state's legal system. It is dependent on the legal recognition of the sovereign state itself and is not derived from international law. But this is now getting quite off-topic.

The situation is that Yau said he had no passport, Yau said that he had no citizenship, and Yau said that he was Chinese at the time of the Fields Medal award. There is no internal contradiction here and it is also corroborated by what is recognized under Chinese nationality law. This is why the entry had a China/None with endnotes that precisely explain this situation. Erasing that leans heavily on WP:OR or a misunderstanding of Yau's situation while obfuscating the precise scenario. — MarkH₂₁^talk 05:52, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

The Chinese Nationality Law is not internationally recognized because it contains China's expansionist ideology and China's unilateral claim to sovereignty in Taiwan. If there is a conflict between Chinese nationality law and international law, Wikipedia should prioritize international law over Chinese nationality law. Koh1989 (talk) 06:11, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

That doesn't even make any sense. There is no such thing as international law on nationality; each country has its own nationality law. — MarkH₂₁^talk 06:13, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

If China enacts a law that says I am Chinese, will I become Chinese? Koh1989 (talk) 06:19, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

If you are a Chinese national under Chinese law, then you are a Chinese national under Chinese law. If you are an American national under American law, then you are an American national under American law. Every sovereign state determines who it recognizes as its nationals and citizens. The only governance on nationality law in international law is that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights prohibits the deprivation of a person's nationality.

But this explanation of how nationality law works is way off-topic now and a waste of time. It's very clear-cut. — MarkH₂₁^talk 06:24, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Prior to 1982, Yau himself had never made any legal attempt to obtain Chinese citizenship. Nationality must be legally recognized. Koh1989 (talk) 06:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

That sounds like WP:OR to me. Cut it out. — MarkH₂₁^talk 06:34, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

References

Removing the entire nationality column

@Koh1989: Looking back at the talk page archive, there actually seemed to have been consensus here to remove the "nationality" column entirely, which I also agree with. It seemed to have been only been added back by an IP recently, so there are grounds to actually just remove the entire column. — MarkH₂₁^talk 06:09, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't think there is any reason to remove nationality from the Wikipedia article. The nationality of the Nobel Laureate or Abel Laureate was not removed from the article. Koh1989 (talk) 06:18, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Then maybe read the linked discussion between Alsee and Rezameyqani again. It leads to a lot of problematic edits and nonsense, particularly from nationalist editors, fly-by editors who don't bother to use reliable sources, and in more ambiguous cases. This particular case previously had a back-and-forth involving Stomatapoll, IPs and editors changing Mirzakhani's and Birkar's nationalities, and much older nonsense before the long-standing consensus to remove the column. — MarkH₂₁^talk 06:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Anyway, the consensus that removes nationality from the article is no longer a long-standing consensus. This is because it has been a long time since the nationality was added and there was no issue of the edit war in the article. The past consensus is no longer a valid consensus. Koh1989 (talk) 06:39, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

That it has been a year since the IP inserted the column back into the table isn't a reason for keeping the column. — MarkH₂₁^talk 06:41, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

The award is given to mathematicians, not to countries. It is not like the Olympics where competitors are explicitly part of a national team. Yau, Mirzakhani, and Birkar are not the only problematic cases; see also Grothendieck and even Bhargava. I agree we're better off without. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:58, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Even if it's not the Olympics, showing the nationality of the winner in an article is better in terms of information than not showing it. The nationalities of the Nobel Laureates and Abel Laureates are also shown on Wikipedia. Koh1989 (talk) 07:04, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

If we shouldn't show the nationalities of the Fields Medalists on Wikipedia because the nationalities of some winners are controversial, should we not show the nationalities of Nobel laureates and Abel laureates as well? Koh1989 (talk) 07:09, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:WAX. And we probably shouldn't. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:12, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

More difficult cases: Zelmanov is listed as Russian despite not every having lived in Russia as a country (he left the Soviet Union for the US before its collapse). Martin Hairer is by birth legally Austrian but was born and grew up in Switzerland, so because of a quirk of national citizenship laws we again list him in a country he never lived in. Terry Tao is stated in his article as Australian-American but this is unsourced and here he is listed as only Australian. Klaus Roth is listed here as only being from the UK but is originally from Germany. I'm beginning to think that more of these are problematic than not. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:47, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

It doesn't make sense not to show the nationality of all medalists because the nationality of some medalists are controversial. If the description of the nationality of the medalist in this article is incorrect, you can refer to the medalist's own Wikipedia article and correct it. 124.49.87.171 (talk) 07:59, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

You already said that. The nationality is not pertinent information for the Fields Medal table, just like including their birthdates or birthplaces isn’t pertinent. Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion. — MarkH₂₁^talk 08:14, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

The nationality of some Nobel Laureates is also controversial, but I have never seen a claim to not show the nationality of all Nobel Laureates in a Wikipedia article. 124.49.87.171 (talk) 08:16, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

The nationality is pertinent information for the Abel Prize table. So why not at the Fields Medal table? 124.49.87.171 (talk) 08:20, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree with MarkH21 and David Eppstein. Koh1989 (the same person as 124.49.87.171?) has not provided any good reason for inclusion. Gumshoe2 (talk) 08:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't think the citizenship / nationality at either birth or time of award is particularly important for this list. Personally, I'd be more interested in the country/countries where Fields medalists learned their mathematics, which would be Switzerland for Hairer, Hong Kong/USA for Yau, and France for Grothendieck. The citizenship / nationality comparatively seems about as relevant as the weekday the medalists were born on. —Kusma (t·c) 08:50, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree with omitting nationality. It doesn't seem particularly relevant. Reyk _YO! 09:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Ditto. --JBL (talk) 11:01, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

I also concur with omitting nationality. XOR'easter (talk) 17:37, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Related discussion

@Koh1989, David Eppstein, Gumshoe2, Kusma, Reyk, JayBeeEll, and XOR'easter: On the basis of the overwhelming consensus above, I have nominated List of countries by number of Fields Medalists for AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of countries by number of Fields Medalists (2nd nomination). — MarkH₂₁^talk 20:50, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

"Reasons" in the table

As it stands, the "reasons" column in the table has the appearance (to me) of providing the official citation for the medalist's work. However, it seems that (except in a few cases) this might not be the case. For the awards up through 1986, the quotes are taken from the IMU website, e.g. from here for 1978. This would seem to be official, but the website directly sources the material as being "reproduced with permission" from the book "International mathematical congresses. An illustrated history 1893 - 1986." That book, as far as I can tell from looking through it, makes no claim at all to be quoting official reasons or citations. I am suspicious that they could all be official, since they are all written in essentially the same style - and suddenly, in the years which the book does not cover, the content on the IMU website changes quite a bit, see e.g. this from 1998 and this from 2002. In 2006 and 2010, they just link to the medalist's personal websites (so in Perelman's case, to wikipedia!). There are unambiguous and clearly official citations for the 2014 medals and the 2018 medals.

Can someone clarify the situation? If there is not a clear reason given by an official source for the award to a certain person, then probably one should not be given here. For instance in the early days of the award, apparently it was awarded more in the spirit of "encouraging future good work" and so it could be simply incorrect to say that it was given for specific achievements. It may give a false impression to suggest otherwise on this page. So perhaps some entries in this column should be left blank? Gumshoe2 (talk) 09:16, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

I've checked the proceedings of the 1962 congress, which I happen to have a physical copy of. I cannot find anywhere where Milnor is cited specifically for his paper on the 7-sphere, as is suggested now on this wiki page. It is of course mentioned in Hassler Whitney's "Work of John Milnor" article, along with other results. Lars Garding's "Work of Lars Hormander" article has the sentence "He has been given a Fields Medal for his outstanding work in the theory of partial differential equations" in the first paragraph, but it does not seem that this is meant as an official laudation. It seems also too vague to be taken out of context. Gumshoe2 (talk) 09:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Female recipients

The fact that there is a section of female recipients is not neutral: the section has no more meaning than putting a section about different ethnicities, sexual orientations, etc. and there is no such section nor should there be one without a neutral justification for it to be (with reliable sources). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgc1994 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 2 December 2020 (UTC)