Talk:John Horton Conway

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Death[edit]

According to this Twitter thread by Colm Mulcahy, John Horton Conway has died. Does anyone have a better source? 70.172.136.61 (talk) 19:03, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • From the mathematical association: tweet. Apparently it was COVID-19 related. 24.60.203.99 (talk) 19:53, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I am somewhat uncomfortable with sourcing his death to tweets exclusively, but if the Mathematical Association would've done their own fact-checking, that plus another organization might work. Enterprisey (talk!) 20:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mathematical Association's reply says "Just word of mouth. Haven’t seen any news articles yet." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.116.14.252 (talk) 21:26, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please watch also the disambiguation page John Conway. I've just reverted an edit. Litlok (talk) 21:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1, 2, 3 close associates. Ivanishkin (talk) 21:48, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know his wife on social media, and she has confirmed his death. She's spoken about it in private posts, but also mentioned it in a public post... would that be considered a valid source? Here is a link: 

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10157773435045399&set=a.49711570398&type=3&theater

Bzzzing (talk) 00:44, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This, also: https://twitter.com/SamWangPhD/status/1249132655737790464 --181.115.109.94 (talk) 00:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Elaborating on my comment above... Diana Conway, John's wife, has talked about his condition on private social media for several days, and he had been very unwell (he had contracted coronavirus) since at least the 7th of April, likely even before that. He passed away sometime in the morning hours today (the 11th of April), which she confirmed in a public posts as well. I'm sure there will eventually be a news piece on it, so we could wait for that. I don't know the protocol for using social media posts as sources. He will be missed greatly. Bzzzing (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been closely following how cause of death is being treated, only to note that it's obviously a matter of contention and debate during this current pandemic. What are the relevant Wikipedia guidelines here? I would not want to see see either false positives or false negatives in the attribution of someone's passing to Covid19. ForestMars (talk) 07:49, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is now being reported in The Guardian Westfablomka (talk) 08:12, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: based on this tweet. Vincent Lefèvre (talk) 11:18, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NRC Handelsblad, one of the most reputable newspapers of the Netherlands reported on his death.[1] Or does it have to be an American/UK source? Someone Not Awful (talk) 18:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There seem to be three quite reliable sources out there now: Le Scienze, NRC, and a local obituary in the New Jersey Saddlebrook Daily Voice. Jokullmusic 18:58, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wait

  • His wife is a primary source. Can't be used in this case. — Lentower (talk) 19:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tweets are not a reliable source. Can't be used in this case. — Lentower (talk) 19:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I translated, using translate.google.com, both Le Scienze & NRC. Neither cites the source of the news of his death. Note knowing that, Wikipedia doesn't trust these as sources. — Lentower (talk) 19:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The New Jersey Saddlebrook Daily Voice cites Princeton scientist Sam Wang. We need the info from another quality source, posted in a reliable source. — Lentower (talk) 19:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See also[edit]

Many of these points for waiting, as well as some not made here, are in the other sections on this talk page, discussing Conway's death's.

References[edit]

References

  1. ^ (in Dutch) Wiskundige Conway was een speels genie en kenner van symmetrie, NRC Handelsblad, Alex van den Brandhof, 12 April 2020

You don't need this section, the reference list is enough. Multiplying sections with the same title across the talk page makes them useless because the link in TOC becomes ambiguous. The section makes sense in articles only, where there is just one such section per page. --CiaPan (talk) 09:52, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CiaPan Articles & Talk Pages have different guidelines. Please read Template:Talkref. My use is also supported by the Wikipedia guidelines. So this template in each section with <ref></ref>'s is what is desired on talk pages. — Lentower (talk) 02:39, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
One way to think about this is that on a talk page each section is a separate article. Another is that Articles & Talk pages are very different. It's one of the reasons they are in separate namespaces. — Lentower (talk) 02:39, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest in the future, when you don't understand a template or WP feature, you read the documentation. Granted the discussion is past, I will spend my time improving our encyclopedia elsewhere, rather then reverting. — Lentower (talk) 02:39, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Does this still need to be protected?[edit]

I have some edits I would like to make without having to go through an {{editsemiprotected}} request, but the article is still protected. Is there any reason to keep the page protected even now that we've decided there are RSes to support his death? 70.172.136.61 (talk) 04:57, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that it's appropriate to lift semiprotection now. Billbrock (talk) 05:37, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Upon reflection, Conway's obituary has not yet been reported in NYT, WaPo, or Princeton homepage. Do we know for certain that he did not rise from the dead on Easter? Billbrock (talk) 05:43, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure Conway's resurrection will look more like this. 2601:648:8202:96B0:E0CB:579B:1F5:84ED (talk) 05:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hah. There is a April Fool's video JHC made at someone's request with a bad Erdös pun.
JHC has his own xkcd memorial now: https://xkcd.com/2293/ 2601:648:8202:96B0:E0CB:579B:1F5:84ED (talk) 04:28, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
i once met him at a train station. What was the glider's apgcode? (talk) 22:37, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

xkcd[edit]

The xkcd comic honoring Conway has been added and removed several times from the article. I don't have a strong opinion either way, but it looks like discussion would be called for before adding or removing it again. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 17:53, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

... and I just reverted removing it again. Let me open discussion. Perhaps a mention of the comic would fit better (and be less controversial) under "Awards and honours"? Such a tribute is a sort of an honor. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 10:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I say remove it as trivia and WP:UNDUE weight. Opencooper (talk) 21:20, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Opencooper. —Emil J. 20:51, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a week, and the only comments have been against inclusion of the webcomic. I agree that it at least doesn't belong in such a prominent place of the article. I'm removing, and will direct any attempting to re-add it to build consensus on the talk page first. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how prominent it was before, and a prominent showing of it doesn't seem appropriate, but an understated mention (e.g. in awards and honors, or popular culture or something) would be good and I'd support that. It comes down to asking whether it is something readers will appreciate, and I think that it is. 2601:648:8202:96B0:3567:50D5:8BFF:4588 (talk) 11:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I like the comic, and I would like to have it displayed somewhere, but rather outside Wikipedia. I don't think the encyclopedia bio article is an appropriate place for linking it. --CiaPan (talk) 16:26, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move on John Conway[edit]

I have started a requested move discussion at Talk:John Conway#Requested move 14 April 2020. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:03, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

article organization[edit]

I tried to clean up the organization a bit since the new edits from @Wuerzele: I think the new sectioning was an improvement, but the game of life details were out of place in Career (they didn't focus on career aspects, and Conway's career didn't overlap much with the game of life, which was something he did mostly on the side). The Martin Gardner friendship is OK in career I think, but this section does need expanding with other eras and aspects of his life. Caleb Stanford (talk) 02:50, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Caleb Stanford:, thank you so much for this post and for moving the game of life stuff out of the career section into a new subsection recreational mathematics. I agree ! I didnt know what to do with these 2 weird mega sections, which had existed previously, and I didnt want to delete them either.
I totally agree that his career section is too thin; editors so far seem not to have bothered with his bio really, only amassing his research achievements!
For example, I noticed on the videos from Princeton (2009) that he must have had a stroke involving his right arm and leg, which I consider a significant piece of his biography, but I do not know sources to "prove" this observation for an entry on his page.--Wuerzele (talk) 09:02, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The move is an improvement, but i don't thin cellular automata er merely recreational mathematics. They are examples and study ground for self-organization. Not sure what a better heading would be, though.--Nø (talk) 10:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree in principle, but traditionally, the branch of math they fall unto is recreational mathematics. It's not meant to be a diss, it's a valid area of math. It could be headed "cellular automata" or "automata theory" to be more specific. Caleb Stanford (talk) 12:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to (Google-)translate my featured article ru:Конвей, Джон Хортон. Its biographical part is based largely on the brilliant book Genius At Play by Siobhan Roberts. colt_browning (talk) 08:33, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! This is great, amazing work. Hope someone has time to translate it -- I may get to it eventually. Caleb Stanford (talk) 14:25, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Horton_Conway&oldid=1212676607"