Talk:Stephen Hawking/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Edit request on 13 February 2013

86.17.132.104 (talk) 09:02, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

nationality = British

please amend to English. . we don't like to be called British all immigrants are british . . . its like calling an American - Canadian or vice versa

Most of the sources say British, not English and we go by sources. The record, I also disagree with (and dislike) the reasoning of the argument above. --Slp1 (talk) 12:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Nationality is a pecisely defined legal status. Only a sovereign nation can confer nationality on it's citizens. England is not such a soveregn entity - it is a subnational part of the United Kingdom. Until England has it's own customs service, military forces and other structures essential for the maintenance of a separate sovereignty its people (together with those of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) will legally be of British nationality. In the same way Texans, New Yorkers, Alaskans, etc. are all Americans. Hawking's ethnicity might be English but that is an entirely separate issue. Roger (talk) 14:44, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

No idea what IP86 is getting at! Or Dodger67 for that matter. English, Scottish and Welsh are recognised national identities. Anyway, I think we'd mainly agree that unless the sources identify someone as particularly English, Scottish or Welsh then british is the safest option. Sionk (talk) 18:46, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 19 February 2013

Please change "Hawking has a motor neurone disease related..." to "Hawking has a motor neuron disease related..." (remove the "e") because "neurone" is french for "neuron" and this is on the English Wikipedia page. Thank you. 99.224.231.110 (talk) 14:18, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Not done. Perhaps you need to start with the Motor Neurone Disease Association and tell them they can't spell. Bencherlite^Talk 14:42, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thanks for the suggestionbut actually the British use the spelling with the 'e'. See [1][2] . This is an article about a Brit, we follow their conventions. Slp1 (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 19 February 2013

In "Later Life and Career", 1975-1990 the second sentence has a grammar error.

"reduced so she could returned to her thesis". Should be return

Aatch (talk) 21:02, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Done Minor edit only. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:31, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Typo

"Honours continued to be awarded: in 1981 Hawking he was awarded the American Franklin Medal, and in 1982 made a Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE)." -- The sentence has an extra he. 88.115.220.120 (talk) 19:36, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 March 2013

in section 3.4 (2000 to present), "an desire" should be "a desire" in "Motivated by an desire both to increase public interest in spaceflight..." Windmonster (talk) 20:34, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Done Minor edit only. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 20:38, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Robert Berman wl

Why is Hawking's tutor Robert Berman piped to Bob Berman, I'm fairly sure they're not the same person. -- 92.2.67.52 (talk) 21:23, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks. You are right. I will pop over and unlink it. Thanks for letting us know.--Slp1 (talk) 22:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 April 2013

You'll see there's an extra "over" in this sentence: Spurred by a dispute over with the University over who would pay for the ramp needed for him to enter his workplace, Ranchorama (talk) 16:07, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I think this sentence needs a "to" in front of the word "solve": Hawking's inaugural lecture as Lucasian Professor of Mathematics was titled: "Is the end in sight for Theoretical Physics" and proposed N=8 Supergravity as the leading theory solve many of the outstanding problems physicists were studying. Ranchorama (talk) 16:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I think this sentence needs a slash, an "and/or", or hyphen between "published" and "developed": He subsequently developed the research in collaboration with Jim Hartle, and in 1983 they published developed a model Ranchorama (talk) 16:19, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I think this sentence needs an "an" before "extraordinary": The book was published in April 1988 in the US and in June in the UK, and proved to be extraordinary success Ranchorama (talk) 16:27, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I think this sentence needs an "a" before "Newsweek": Media attention was intense,[173] and Newsweek magazine cover and a television special Ranchorama (talk) 16:29, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I think you should replace "in" with "to" in this sentence: The particle, proposed in exist as part of the Higgs Field theory by Peter Higgs in 1964,

Ranchorama (talk) 16:42, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I think you should delete either "a" or "the", as well as put a comma after "Appropriately" in this sentence: Appropriately given Hawking's association with time, he unveiled the a striking new mechanical "Chronophage" Ranchorama (talk) 16:45, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

There is a typo near the text "Proposed in exist" which should be "Proposed to exist" (talking about Higgs particles)

220.233.102.231 (talk) 01:00, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I think I have fixed all these typos. Materialscientist (talk) 01:22, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Comment

Stephen William Hawking, the eldest son of Frank Hawking and Isobel Hawking was born on January 8, 1942. His birth was on the 300th anniversary of the death of the famous physicist Galileo in Oxford, England. Stephen inherited his great mind from his parents, with his mother being one of the first women to attend and graduate from Oxford University in the 1930s. His father was also an Oxford University graduate and became a respected medical researcher on tropical diseases. Stephen would have no choice but to feed his mind as a child, living and being in a family who ate dinner silently with each person reading a book. The Hawking family car was an old taxi and their home in St. Albans was a three floor “fixer-upper” that never got fixed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcus clemmons (talk • contribs) 06:44, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Marcus. I moved your comment down here because we usually add new topics to the bottom of the page rather than the top. I am a bit confused about your post. Is it a suggestion for a change in the article? If it is, you'll note that some of this information is already included in the article, and some of it would need a reliable source for it to be included. Some of it seems actually be incorrect; for example women were allowed to graduate from Oxford in 1920.[3]. --Slp1 (talk) 16:27, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Dancing into the small hours?

So, is this quote in the article actually correct, or is this a joke? If correct then it would definitely need some clarifications as to how exactly was he dancing when completely paralyzed - right now it seems just like a bad joke.

Hawking travelled extensively to promote his work, and enjoyed partying and dancing into the small hours.

--90.190.224.104 (talk) 19:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

boycotts Israel

The reference I added clarified it. [4]

The University of Cambridge released a statement Wednesday indicating that Hawking had told the Israelis last week that he would not be attending "based on advice from Palestinian academics that he should respect the boycott.

University officials said they had "previously understood" that Hawking's decision was based solely on health concerns -- he is 71 and has severe disabilities -- but had now been told otherwise by Hawking's office.

So its been cleared up. His office and the university verified the story. Dream Focus 16:14, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

It seems our article is incorrectly attributing Hawking's nonattendance at an Israeli conference to an "academic boycott of Israel" when this source would seem to attribute the nonattendance to "health, not boycott". Bus stop (talk) 16:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

No, they cleared that up. Read both bits I posted above. The university previously thought it was for health reasons, but his office told them it was for the boycott. We got by what he said through his official office, not what others have said. Dream Focus 16:44, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Note: this topic is being discussed at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Stephen_Hawking. GabrielF (talk) 16:46, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 8 May 2013

Redundancy: In St Albans, the family were considered highly intelligent and somewhat eccentric; meals often spent in silence with everyone's nose in a book. reading in silence. Fofiriam (talk) 18:36, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Fixed that, and reworded it a bit to improve the grammar and remove the idiomatic phrasing. Thanks for pointing it out!Rivertorch (talk) 20:11, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 8 May 2013

It should be added to Stephen Hawking's page that he has joined and endorses the Boycott of Israel

Krattadam (talk) 23:18, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 00:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

It's already in the article, actuallySlp1 (talk) 01:02, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Personal life/Health section?

The information about Hawking's health and personal life seems intertwined in the long "Career" section at the moment. Would it be better to separate his professional achievments from his personal milestones/battles? After all, many people know him as much for his health problems/mechanical voice as they do his academic success. Sionk (talk) 14:22, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

It was previously separated, more or less, but with repetition. I proposed joining the narrative up in a section above and several thought it was a good idea, so that's what I have done. I personally think that a flowing narrative is better because the more I read the more I realize that his academic success and physical problems are in fact highly linked, in the eyes of the world and his fellow academics. See this appreciation by fellow scientists and his biographer for example. [5]. Slp1 (talk) 13:47, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I feel like the information on his physical health is lacking in regards to conveying it in a narrative or chronological sense, it could stand to be refined by someone with a more complete understanding. I came to this article curious for information on his health and the way in which is intertwined in the article feels sporadic (almost random) and incomplete. Just as a for instance, there's a sentence that noted he was given two years to live when he was 21, then nothing else. What happened? Was the diagnosis at 21 simply wildly incorrect? Did the disease regress? Its mentioned later that he has difficulty walking and his speech becomes "unintelligible," in the same paragraph its noted he returns to work and publicly challenges people during lectures. Later its noted that it isn't until the 1970s that his speech deteriorates to a point that he needs someone to help translate his words. Again, what's happening here, was the previous mention of his physical failings references to "episodes" or momentary difficulties, or was it some brief period that he overcame, or is this an instance of the writer not understanding the word "unintelligible"? Additionally the way its broken up to fit into the time periods and some wording/phrasing choices make it unclear whether his health was gradually declining, or if he has periods of stability with his health followed by bursts of dramatic declines.Gheorghe Zamfir (talk) 08:55, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Gheorghe Zamfir, thanks for these comments. It is helpful to have some outside eyes for these kinds of problems with flow, terminiology, and explanations. I will try and work on these in the next few days.Slp1 (talk) 13:08, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Boycott or not?

Re the previous thread, I have reverted a carelessly-worded redundant mention of it, but I'm actually concerned that at least some reliable reports e.g. this AP article) contradict what we're repeating in the article. Until this point is clarified (if it ever is), I think we probably should just be saying that he has canceled plans to attend. We could note that there are conflicting reports, but that's just recentism getting in the way of clear, encyclopedic writing. Rivertorch (talk) 06:35, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, yes, I agree totally about the recentism aspect, and think that 2 sentences (rather than a quick mention) is too much for this. I'm going to trim in soon, I think. However, I do think that the latest info explains some of the contradictory reports. The timeline seems to be:

• Guardian says he is not going to Israel because of boycott and this is widely reported
• Cambridge U says "no, the reasons are health" and this is widely reported
• Cambridge U corrects their statement after receiving information from Hawking's office. And this is widely reported too!!

See this for example.[6]Slp1 (talk) 13:39, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Cool. So it is still unfolding. I'm new to this article and will gladly leave it up to you to trim it. Just wanted to weigh in. Rivertorch (talk) 17:24, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Error

The article says that "Hawking has estimated that he studied about 1000 hours during his three years at Oxford. These unimpressive study habits made sitting his Finals a challenge, and he decided to answer only theoretical physics questions rather than those requiring factual knowledge." The problems with this statement are so egregious that the stupidity inherent cannot be overstated. There is nothing non-factual in physics. This is graffiti of the worst sort and I would request someone to reword it without anti-science bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.136.192.1 (talk) 15:44, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Photograph before the wheelchair?

Is there any available/useable photograph of Hawking standing up? It would be very useful! Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 07:16, 23 May 2013 (UTC)