Talk:Shaw Prize: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Shreevatsa (talk | contribs) →Redundancy: done |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
:During the FL process, it was suggested that the tables should be sortable. But I guess you are right, sorting seems less useful here. So, feel free to restore your version. Though please keep the article consistent. Either all the tables are sortable, or all of them have rowspans.—<font face="Cambria" size="3">[[User:Chrishomingtang|<font color="black">Chris!</font>]]<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Chrishomingtang|<font color="black">c</font>]]/[[User talk:Chrishomingtang|<font color="black">t</font>]]</sub></font> 20:44, 18 June 2010 (UTC) |
:During the FL process, it was suggested that the tables should be sortable. But I guess you are right, sorting seems less useful here. So, feel free to restore your version. Though please keep the article consistent. Either all the tables are sortable, or all of them have rowspans.—<font face="Cambria" size="3">[[User:Chrishomingtang|<font color="black">Chris!</font>]]<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Chrishomingtang|<font color="black">c</font>]]/[[User talk:Chrishomingtang|<font color="black">t</font>]]</sub></font> 20:44, 18 June 2010 (UTC) |
||
:: I've made the change, out of some masochistic reason. :-) Note that this also lets the table make it clearer that two life sciences prizes were awarded in 2004. The only unfortunate(?) consequence is that while earlier the first two tables were displayed at reduced width (because of the images) and the third at full width, now all three are displayed at the same width. Of course, removing one of the images or slightly decreasing their height would restore the previous situation. While it's good to have images, the tables look prettier (I feel) without line breaks. :-) [[User:Shreevatsa|Shreevatsa]] ([[User talk:Shreevatsa|talk]]) 22:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC) |
:: I've made the change, out of some masochistic reason. :-) Note that this also lets the table make it clearer that two life sciences prizes were awarded in 2004. The only unfortunate(?) consequence is that while earlier the first two tables were displayed at reduced width (because of the images) and the third at full width, now all three are displayed at the same width. Of course, removing one of the images or slightly decreasing their height would restore the previous situation. While it's good to have images, the tables look prettier (I feel) without line breaks. :-) [[User:Shreevatsa|Shreevatsa]] ([[User talk:Shreevatsa|talk]]) 22:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC) |
||
== Error? == |
|||
Andrew Wiles works in Princeton but he's British, not American. Is there a reason for US instead of UK being there? |
|||
Revision as of 12:08, 19 June 2010
 | Shaw Prize is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Hong Kong FL‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
 | Awards FL‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
historical prizes
can anyone find a list of the laureates from pre-2004? i couldn't find one with a few minutes of googling, but it would be nice to have Roadnottaken (talk) 16:53, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- The awards are first presented in 2004, hence there are no laureates prior to 2004. OhanaUnitedTalk page 21:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Redundancy
Why do we list each year multiple times, once for each winner that year, with corresponding (identical) rationales repeated so often? This can be easily avoided using a rowspan. (The only downside is an apparent Mediawiki bug that inteferes with sorting, but the table is already sorted by year, and there seems no good reason to want sorting by name or country, for such small tables.) For an example of what I'm talking of, compare the "mathematical sciences" section here and here. Shreevatsa (talk) 20:15, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- During the FL process, it was suggested that the tables should be sortable. But I guess you are right, sorting seems less useful here. So, feel free to restore your version. Though please keep the article consistent. Either all the tables are sortable, or all of them have rowspans.—Chris!c/t 20:44, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- I've made the change, out of some masochistic reason. :-) Note that this also lets the table make it clearer that two life sciences prizes were awarded in 2004. The only unfortunate(?) consequence is that while earlier the first two tables were displayed at reduced width (because of the images) and the third at full width, now all three are displayed at the same width. Of course, removing one of the images or slightly decreasing their height would restore the previous situation. While it's good to have images, the tables look prettier (I feel) without line breaks. :-) Shreevatsa (talk) 22:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Error?
Andrew Wiles works in Princeton but he's British, not American. Is there a reason for US instead of UK being there?