Talk:Pao Ming Pu

Untitled

Corensearchbot is correct but this is my own work. Katzmik (talk) 09:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I included the gnu permission at my homepage as per the instructions given in the corensearchbot message. Katzmik (talk) 10:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I have removed the deletion tag and placed several other maintenance tags on the article, as well as noting the source for GFDL attribution concerns. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why the source needs to be mentioned in the Wikipedia article. The author of the text has retained copyright, so he is not bound by the terms of the GFDL and he is free to copy the text wherever he likes without giving attribution. For future reference, the source refered to is http://www.cs.biu.ac.il/~katzmik/sgtdirectory/pu.html . -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 09:53, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

As likely as it seems that the contributor was telling the truth here, there's nothing at that website to indicate that. :) We can't presume this is true any more than we presume it is true when contributors here assert they have permission. We need external verification. But if the article no longer copies text verbatim from that source—and it looks like it doesn't—then it's completely unnecessary. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

redirect to Pu, Baoming

It seems to be the custom at wikipedia to list the first name first, as a matter of fact. If this is the case, then this move is not justified. Could somebody comment? Incidentally, I noticed recently that "Pu" means "simple". Could a person knowledgeable in the appropriate language, make a comment in the article? Katzmik (talk) 17:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

copying from WPM:

No, Pu(蒲)!=Pu(朴=simple), the surname 蒲 means cattai,wine or a name of palace. Chinese (specially from China after 1949) name should be write as standardlized style(Surname Givenname, with no ","). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyi (talk • contribs) 22:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Bao Ming Pu

The article was recently redirected by placing the last name first. What are the wiki standards in this area? Katzmik (talk) 21:05, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

“Generally, article naming should prefer what the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize.” Since all occurrences of his name in the western literature use western name order, and since he himself used the initials "P. M. Pu" in his own Pac. J. Math paper, we should go by that name: "Pao Ming Pu" or possible "Pao-Ming Pu". A comparison of Google scholar searches for P.M. Pu versus B. M. Pu shows that he is generally recognized with the P. initial. Also, note for example that we have an article named (in the English Wikipedia) Paul Erdős, although his name would natively have been Erdős Pál. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:18, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I just checked the citation profile at mathscinet. The most frequently cited article (28 citations) spells his name P. M. The second most frequent (8 citations) spells it Pao Ming. The third most frequent (1 citation) spells it Pao-Ming. Based on this criterion, it seems the best course would be to spell out the initials P. M. and move the page to Pao Ming Pu. If nobody objects, I will move it back to that location. Katzmik (talk) 12:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

deleted irrelevant events

Following Chiang Kai-shek's ouster from the mainland in 1949, there was apparently a wave of recalls of Chinese academics working in the West. One such case was Wu, Wen Tsün, a student of Ehresmann's in Paris, who one day disappeared from France without saying a word to anyone, according to eyewitness testimony by Marcel Berger.

Pu may have also been forced to return to the mainland by the communist authorities.

The first paragraph was irrelevant events. There is no evidence for forced. He could go to Taiwan and stay in U.S. as he wish. There were any evidence for Qian Xuesen, Hua Luogeng, Deng Jiaxian were Foreced by the commuist authorities?--刻意 10:44, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps because someone who had spent time in the West was automatically suspect, Pu was unable to advise students for most of his scientific career.

Also no evidence, He is the Chairman of the department of Sichuan Univ. 1952-1984, honorary Chairman until his dealth. And (copy from http://www.swxl.com.cn/math/ShowArticle.asp?ArticleID=313)

蒲保明除担任四川大学数学系主任(1952——1984)，名誉系主任(1984——)，四川大学数学研究所副所长(1978——1984)外，还担任过多种社会职务和学术职务．

(1)主要社会职务．四川省政协委员(1963——1977)，四川省人民代表(1978——)，九三学社四川省委员会顾问(1984——)等．

(2)重要学术职务．中国数学会理事(1980——)，基础数学博士导师(第一批，1981——)，中国模糊数学与模糊系统学会第一届理事长(1983——1985)，中国数学会成都分会理事兼秘书长(1954——1978)，四川省数学会副理事长(1978——1987)，名誉理事长(1987年后)，东北一般拓扑学会顾问，高等学校理科数学力学教材编审委员会委员，以及多种数学丛书和杂志的主编、编委等．

Was he unable?--刻意 10:56, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

(1)主要社会职务．四川省政协委员(1963——1977)，四川省人民代表(1978——)，九三学社四川省委员会顾问(1984——)等．

A deputy to the CPPCC in Sichuan(1963—1977), a deputy to the NPC in Sichuan(1978—), these titles mean he was very repected by the communist authorities, even in the culture revolutionary(1966-1976). --刻意 11:14, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello, 刻意, and thanks for your interest in your article.

The text says "may have been forced". That means that there is no solid evidence for it. But it doesn't really matter whether we think there is evidence. What matters is what other people write. The book says that he may have been forced back to China, so that is what we report. If people write conflicting things, then we can discuss what we write.

Now, on his ability to supervise students. Is there anything in the obituary that suggests that he supervised students before? It is definitely good to know that he was one of the first to get the status of "boshi sheng dao shi".

Then his other positions, for instance as chair of the department. I don't understand why they have been deleted from the article. That looks like relevant information to me. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 19:05, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

At first, you guys should note that the 2ed section was copied from that link without any changes. Do not copy text from other websites without a GFDL-compatible license. It will be deleted.

Second. The word may means nothing. As the word goes, Everything is Possible. Politician are good at using such words like may, probably blabla to mislead people. We are not talking about the zeros of Riemann zeta funtion. The accusing was groundless if there is no evidence. Of course, an acceptable report could be "Some book said but without any evidence...".

As for Boshisheng daoshi(博士生 导师, doctor's surpvisor), there are no doctors in new China befor 1983, and no doctor's surpvisor before 1981. He do supervised graduate students(for master) before but not doctor, for example Zhou Haoxuan was his graduat student in 1960s.

When he return China, he became the Chair of math-department, did a lot of work. But his work was suspended for several years in the Cultural Revolution, this should be writen in appropriate words.

At last, Happy new year.--Keyi 14:53, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Your first point is easy to address. The website [1] containing the text is indeed GFDL.

I'll try to find a suitable reformulation for the rest later. Best wishes for the new year from me too. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 15:42, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

One thing that puzzles me when I look over this discussion is how a mathematics book, which includes a smattering of history and the author's speculation on the history, becomes used as a source in a BLP to make some serious charges. If Katz's book is anything like most math books, the history portion is hardly going to be as seriously researched, say, like the way a historian or biographer would. Katz's mistaken implication about Boshisheng daoshi is an indication of such. --C S (talk) 10:53, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

He could go to Taiwan and stay in U.S. as he wish

Trotsky as I recall went to Mexico as he wished. The remark quoted in the title of this subsection ("He could go as he wish") may be revealing of the objectivity of user:Keyi. Katzmik (talk) 16:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Trosky was different for political reason( he was killed by KGB).

Giving a short list of Chinese scholars for compare,

Stay in U.S.

• Shiing-shen Chern
• Frank Yang
• Tsung-Dao Lee

(These 3 men have good relationship with China after 1980, as you know Chern was died in China 4 years ago) Return

• Qian xueseng
• Wu Wenjun
• Su Buqing
• Deng Jiaxian

At the beginning of 1950s, new China was highly doubted by overseas Chinese,return was respected by the authorities. As you see, Pu became the chair when he return. These people may disappointed in the following years. Considering what happened in 1960s&1970s and their contributions contrast with who stayed in U.S., staying is a better choice for the half of individuals. I had not heared who was forced back to China in that ages. Today, a lot of (maybe almost) Chinese students stay in U.S.--Keyi 17:01, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I have no illusions about, nor ambition for, convincing you of the evils of, and the murderous nature of, Soviet and Chinese communism. I do hope, however, to prevent you from imposing your POV at this particular page, which is closely related to my research interests. Katzmik (talk) 17:20, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

You are just doing undo(3?), I will not do that again. --Keyi 17:45, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I have no objection to modifying the page so as to attribute the information explicitly to the book. However, if you delete it we will end up in arbitration which will result in an unnecesssary waste of time for everybody involved. Katzmik (talk) 17:48, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I will welcome Third opinion or an arbitration.--Keyi 08:44, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Keyi, it does not matter whether we think it's likely that Pu was forced back. But it is a good idea to attribute the information explicitly, so I did that.

Katzmik, I don't see why you removed statements that Keyi added like that Pu was head of department. Blindly reverting only serves to escalate the conflict. Thus, I added them back in.

Keyi, could you perhaps help me with formatting the reference to http://www.swxl.com.cn/math/ShowArticle.asp?ArticleID=313 ? My Chinese is not that good. Do I understand it correctly that the author is 白苏华 (presumably the same guy as the fourth author of the obituary published in Shuxue Jinzhan = Advances in Mathematics) and that the article is published in 文章来源 ? When was it published? The only date I can find is 26 March 2008 which seems rather late. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 21:01, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

You understanding is right. 白苏华=Bai Suhua, also the fourth author of "in menmory of ...". 文章来源="现代教育报" means the article was come from "Morden Education News", that website belongs to that newspaper. The date 2008-3-26 was when it was posted on internet.(On the otherhand, considering Chinese didnot regard copyright, it seems copy from some book, may be a chinese encyclopaedia book. I will try to check that after the 3-days vacation.)

P.S. Can you download the article of in memory of Bao Ming Pu? I cann't, if you can, send it to me, please.

--Keyi 05:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

I haven't seen the article. I looked for it on the internet but I can't find it. Is it available online? I can probably get it from the British Library but that will take a few weeks. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 16:06, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Available at here, but our university didn't buy it, in Library I could find it some other day. http://dlib.cnki.net/kns50/detail.aspx?filename=SXJZ199002007&dbname=CJFD1990

--Keyi 20:40, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to Jitse

User:Keyi wrote above: I will welcome Third opinion or an arbitration.--Keyi 08:44, 1 January 2009 (UTC) Now Jitse has been selflessly providing such a third opinion, so administrative complications would seem to be unnecessary. Katzmik (talk) 12:59, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Cultural Revolution

I agree that the Cultural Revolution is infamous; but that is my opinion. It has no place in an article on the history of mathematics, although Pu's actual sufferings in the period would. Similarly, Augustin Louis Cauchy is no place for invective against the French Revolution.

We are not here to avoid the misunderstandings of the semi-literate; that is what Simple Wikipedia is for. Any literate reader of English calls that period the Cultural Revolution; anybody who thinks it "cultured and refined" is either unaware that English words are polyvalent (and insofar illiterate) or too hopelessly Maoist to be persuaded by an adjective here. Tell me, are we to qualify "cultures of smallpox" because someone might think them refined or stylish? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:03, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

The usage of the term "culture" with regard to medical tests is common knowledge. The usage of "culture" in reference to obscure events of chinese history is not common knowledge. By your definition of semi-literate, I think a vast majority of wikipedia readers will be semi-literate. The relevance of this to this particular article is that, as part of the totalitarian repression, Pu was (1) not allowed to supervise students during most of his career; (2) was not allowed to pursue research outside fuzzy mathematics which at the time was considered the only progressive form of mathematics in the mainland. If it were not for the curious attitudes toward research, systolic geometry which Pu helped initiate would most likely have been developed by him and his students, rather than waiting for a resurgence of interest in France a couple of decades later. Be that as it may, it does not seem unreasonable to give the reader at least a hint as to what happened to Pu the geometer. Now if opposition to my famous adjective extends far and wide beyond Mr. Keyi, I have no objection to deleting it, if the arguments above do not succeed in swaying anyone :) Katzmik (talk) 16:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S. As far as the French Revolution goes, I think an argument can be made that had the revolutionaries issued a degree proclaiming calculus to be a reactionary deviation, such a detail could find its place in Augustin Louis Cauchy, don't you think? Katzmik (talk) 16:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

This is special pleading for emotionally charged language, which we have no need for. I commend the approach of this recent edit (on another emotional subject) which I happen to be watching. We should prefer to give the "just the facts, ma'am" and let others find the morals.

Cauchy was in fact kept out of a professorship for political reasons; we give the facts, without aspersing the Orleanists with adjectives. Elsewhere, we summarize Cauchy's political and religious views, without subscribing to them. Again, Lavoisier quotes "the Republic has no need for scientists or chemists", but never says "infamous". Similarly, here, we should state the constraints on Pu's research (with sources), we don't. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:36, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Is it really true that a person who would be silly to take the term "Cultural Revolution" (with those capitals) as "cultural revolution" would be tipped off by "infamous Cultural Revolution" and take note it does not mean "infamous cultural revolution"? --C S (talk) 02:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, it certainly looks like I am outnumbered on "infamous". As far as sources for Pu's research are concerned, it suffices to look it up on mathscinet. He has about 10 papers. The two papers published before he returned were in complex analysis and geometry. Then there is a pause of about 27 years. The remaining publications are all in fuzzy mathematics. Keyi seems to think there were some intervening publications in complex analysis--perhaps published in the mainland? If there is a significant publication record outside fuzzy mathematics, that would tend to refute my contention. Katzmik (talk) 15:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

In memory of Mr. Pu Baoming

Today, I copied the article from lib. It was not an authoritative [xxx], Pu Baoming was dead in 1988-02-24, that menory recieved by editors in 1989-04-07, published in April 1990, two years after his death. The four author were his students or colleagues, didnot stand for authoritie. This is a misunderstanding of XXX. What you known was from XXX, what he written was doubtable.

That article contain more information about Mr. Pu, It was a simplifyed version of http://www.swxl.com.cn/math/ShowArticle.asp?ArticleID=313 , this page says more details.

Pu's interest included meromorphic funcion, differential geometry, gerneral topology, fuzzy topolgy.

"(1) not allowed to supervise students during most of his career; (2) was not allowed to pursue research outside fuzzy mathematics which at the time was considered the only progressive form of mathematics in the mainland."

There is no evidences and references supporting your (2). (1) was written by XXX, also no evidences and references.

As for famous, I never use interjection in an article. --Keyi 05:41, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Absence of students before the end of the infamous revolution is noted in the book cited at the page. The author studied the question based on secondary sources, including translation of chinese originals. If you have evidence that he had students before you should present it. As the original version of the article mentioned, and you confirmed, he received the honorary title in '79 and certainly had students afterwards. Katzmik (talk) 15:55, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Fuzzy mathematics in the mainland

From conversations with senior mathematicians I have learned that during the sixties and seventies, a "relevance" standard was applied to mathematics in the mainland, to the detriment of pure mathematics, and to the benefit of fuzzy mathematics. I have only anecdotal evidence for this, though, having assumed until now that this is common knowledge. I would appreciate if anyone could point me in the right direction to learn more about it. I think of it in terms of Soviet "Lysenko doctrine" in biology that has replaced legitimate biology for a significant period, to the detriment of legitimate science (unlike Lysenko doctrine, fuzzy math is legitimate), as well as Soviet opposition to the big bang theory which was deemed either bourgeois or reactionary, I do not recall which. But perhaps such analogies are too easy. Katzmik (talk) 14:35, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Transliteration

Is the Wade-Giles transliteration of his name really "Pu Baoming"? The Wade-Giles article says:

"Examples using the spiritus asper: p, pʽ, t, tʽ, k, kʽ, ch, chʽ. The use of this character preserves b, d, g, and j for the romanization of Chinese varieties containing voiced consonants, such as Shanghainese (which has a full set of voiced consonants) and Min Nan (Hō-ló-oē) whose century-old Pe̍h-ōe-jī (POJ, often called Missionary Romanization) is similar to Wade–Giles..."

If his name is in Mandarin, then I think it should be P'u Paoming or something similar. 93.136.54.227 (talk) 18:46, 2 October 2020 (UTC)