This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of computer scientists article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In case the wording at the top of this list is not strong enough, this list should be for research scientists, not anybody with a CS degree and not random progammers. They should also be notable - either a mile-long list of CS publications and/or a significant accomplishment, although the accomplishment can be non-computer-science related, for instance a memorable quote, best-selling SF books, longest motorcycle jump, etc.
What should one do if a computer scientist or other academic suspects that an article or entry was created by a former or current student? Can the subject of the article request its deletion because of possibility of conflict of interest (although he/she was not aware of the article when it was created and did not influence its contents)? Docfeinman007 ( talk) 02:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I don't think a strong argument could be made that G�del was a computer scientist (any more so than Georg Cantor or David Hilbert). Someone want to prove me wrong Chadloder 06:55 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
I added Herman Hollerith who was not a research scientist at all; but his work on punched card machines was an important (perhaps the only) step between Babbage & Lovelace before him and the theoretical work and analogue computers that came after him. -- Sewing 18:12, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Euler, Hertz, and Leibniz were computer scientists? Huh? If I'm just overreacting, let me know, but I think these should be removed Dysprosia 23:20, 6 Nov 2003 (UTC)
"Per Brinch-Hansen" is listed. "Brinch Hansen", not "Brinch-Hansen", is his surname, per book he wrote around 1970. (Someone may want to think about the overall approach of the list; my edit is the best way i can come up with for handling within this format.) --
Jerzy 05:49, 2004 Jan 29 (UTC)
What about Mark Zuckerberg? He is obviously not a computer scientist (Unless we want to include the gang of Gates, Jobs, Page, etc. here as well). Zzarch ( talk) 07:11, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
I don't think Linus really qualifies as a computer scientist, since I don't think he's done any research. He's already on the programmers lists, that should be good enough. Stan 05:02, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
While annotations on the list are good reminders of who's who when you're looking for someone, I don't think there's much need to link all the terms in the annotation lines. They aren't that useful, because the bios have that, and it means that the "what links here" for every major topic includes this list, irrelevant at best. Stan 05:02, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I noticed that this name is in lower case and was about to change it to title case, but decided to double check it first. I did a Google search and can find no evidence of the existance of this computer scientist. Maybe the name here is spelt differently to his actual name. Does anyone know who he is or is this name a spam addition to the article? Big Mac 00:37, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to assume that like most wikipedia lists, we don't want items in the list until they've been shown to be notable enough to have an article to link to. That is, this list should not be the place for notability decisions. So I'm taking out the red-linked individuals. Dicklyon 16:26, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Should this list contain all computer scientists who are notable enough to have a wikipedia article? If not, who should be included? Category:Computer scientists + subcategories contain many people not on this list, and most of them are known for something. — Miym ( talk) 18:31, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
In case anyone is interested, 524 (88%) of the 594 listed are men, and 70 (12%) are women. Scientists with names that could be either men or women (such as Lee and Robin) were carefully checked for gender using Wikipedia. Here is the raw data: http://MenAssociation.com/article/ComputerScientists
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of computer scientists article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In case the wording at the top of this list is not strong enough, this list should be for research scientists, not anybody with a CS degree and not random progammers. They should also be notable - either a mile-long list of CS publications and/or a significant accomplishment, although the accomplishment can be non-computer-science related, for instance a memorable quote, best-selling SF books, longest motorcycle jump, etc.
What should one do if a computer scientist or other academic suspects that an article or entry was created by a former or current student? Can the subject of the article request its deletion because of possibility of conflict of interest (although he/she was not aware of the article when it was created and did not influence its contents)? Docfeinman007 ( talk) 02:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I don't think a strong argument could be made that G�del was a computer scientist (any more so than Georg Cantor or David Hilbert). Someone want to prove me wrong Chadloder 06:55 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
I added Herman Hollerith who was not a research scientist at all; but his work on punched card machines was an important (perhaps the only) step between Babbage & Lovelace before him and the theoretical work and analogue computers that came after him. -- Sewing 18:12, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Euler, Hertz, and Leibniz were computer scientists? Huh? If I'm just overreacting, let me know, but I think these should be removed Dysprosia 23:20, 6 Nov 2003 (UTC)
"Per Brinch-Hansen" is listed. "Brinch Hansen", not "Brinch-Hansen", is his surname, per book he wrote around 1970. (Someone may want to think about the overall approach of the list; my edit is the best way i can come up with for handling within this format.) --
Jerzy 05:49, 2004 Jan 29 (UTC)
What about Mark Zuckerberg? He is obviously not a computer scientist (Unless we want to include the gang of Gates, Jobs, Page, etc. here as well). Zzarch ( talk) 07:11, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
I don't think Linus really qualifies as a computer scientist, since I don't think he's done any research. He's already on the programmers lists, that should be good enough. Stan 05:02, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
While annotations on the list are good reminders of who's who when you're looking for someone, I don't think there's much need to link all the terms in the annotation lines. They aren't that useful, because the bios have that, and it means that the "what links here" for every major topic includes this list, irrelevant at best. Stan 05:02, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I noticed that this name is in lower case and was about to change it to title case, but decided to double check it first. I did a Google search and can find no evidence of the existance of this computer scientist. Maybe the name here is spelt differently to his actual name. Does anyone know who he is or is this name a spam addition to the article? Big Mac 00:37, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to assume that like most wikipedia lists, we don't want items in the list until they've been shown to be notable enough to have an article to link to. That is, this list should not be the place for notability decisions. So I'm taking out the red-linked individuals. Dicklyon 16:26, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Should this list contain all computer scientists who are notable enough to have a wikipedia article? If not, who should be included? Category:Computer scientists + subcategories contain many people not on this list, and most of them are known for something. — Miym ( talk) 18:31, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
In case anyone is interested, 524 (88%) of the 594 listed are men, and 70 (12%) are women. Scientists with names that could be either men or women (such as Lee and Robin) were carefully checked for gender using Wikipedia. Here is the raw data: http://MenAssociation.com/article/ComputerScientists