Talk:Donald Knuth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Donald Knuth article.
Article policies
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article has an assessment summary page.
Wikipedian An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, Donald Knuth, has edited Wikipedia as
171.66.180.182 (talk · contribs)

Contents

[edit] He's dead

Somebody added a note to the top of the page (before the interlanguage links, even) claiming that Donald Knuth was dead. Aside from the poor formatting, it was very un-NPOV, so much so I figured it was better reverted and double-checked. The page linked to here doesn't say anything about it, but since it's his personal page, I wouldn't really expect it to be promptly updated if he had died. :-\ Do we have any Stanford people who can check his status? -- John Owens 12:01 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Knock knock. "Professor Knuth, are you alright in there" :) No I think we can safely assume Stanford's daily events page would have listed it. The death of this great man would probably be considered more important than a few art exhibitions and Stanford Garden Tours. -- Tim Starling 12:17 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)
The page you're refering to doesn't go back till 2001. I just stumbled over a page that claims that he died on February 10 2001: http://www.wchs.srsd.sk.ca/Barteski/Computers%209/Brettttt%20Duponttttt.htm
Another page talks about him in past tense: http://www.larry.denenberg.com/Knuth-3-16/
This last is a spoof (and says so, if you read it). -- The Anome 22:38, 5 Oct 2003 (UTC)
I can't find anything else on the internet that supports or disproves that he died. I hope this is not true!

Knuth is still alive as of August 2003 -- hooray! See the fine print in http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/news.html -- The Anome 22:42, 5 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Seeing as he's my math instructor's father, and my instructor has said nothing... i'd say so. :)

[edit] Of all things

an edit history summary said:

(mention hobbies, wife (who wrote a book on liturgy of all things - wonder if was marked up in TeX??))

"of all things"? You obviously haven't really looked at the list of Knuth's own publications... —Paul A 01:42, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Grammar

The paragraph that starts with "He pioneered the concept of literate programming" has poor grammar. Maybe someone who knows more about lists and semicolons can rework it. cbm 02:51, 2004 Feb 1 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation

Can someone add a phonetic spelling of Knuth? Parts of Michigan believe the K is silent. (have mercy on my first wiki post)thanks

From Knuth's webpage( http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/faq.html ), it is pronounced Ka-NOOTH. Someone should add that to the article ... Not sure how phonetics work in Wikipedia. -- Neoncow 19:08, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Ka-NOOTH may be how he gives his name's pronunciation on his website but what's needed here, to make it comprehensible, is an IPA transcription. IPA is how phonetics work in Wikipedia. Jimp 28Nov05
Of course "Ka-NOOTH" would probably be transcribed as /kəˈnuːθ/. The Storm Surfer 00:54, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
And of course what's meant by ka-NOOTH is rather KNOOTH, or /ˈknuːθ/. —Nightstallion (?) 00:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Then which is correct, /kəˈnuːθ/ or /ˈknuːθ/? Is a pronounced? -- Envia 13:20, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Not if you can help it, but it's OK to pronounce it. --Kjoonlee 21:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] hoax?

Looks like this addition that he died is a hoax. No one is reporting it, nothing on slashdot, nothing on news.google.com. --rydel 01:59, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I bashed all the bogus redirs, they will never catch typos or have any other use. Stan 03:42, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have received an email today from the head of the computer science department at Stanford, saying he had not heard of Knuth's death, and would have heard if it had happened. Michael Hardy 00:07, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have seen Donald Knuth today, and even took a photograph. For a dead person, he discusses mathematics surprisingly well. David.Monniaux 21:30, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Please -- we settled this question last November. Knuth lives. Michael Hardy 23:12, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
If we cannot even joke on talk pages... David.Monniaux 07:37, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Yes, but unless he's immortal (we should be so lucky), it's a question that must be settled every day. Max Hyre 13:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese name

Chinese name of Knuth was added on Feb 16, 2005 by Yaohua2000. I could not find any relation to China, only comment on his webpage: [1].

The webpage suggests it is a joke. It should be removed from first paragraph. Pavel Vozenilek 16:22, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

See this webpage [2], the first line says: Donald E. Knuth (高德纳), Professor Emeritus of... --Yaohua2000 03:09, 2005 Mar 16 (UTC)
Yes but is it anything else than a joke? Some people put an icon next to their names, Knuth has something original. Pavel Vozenilek 17:57, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
It is not icon, it is yin4zhang1, Chinese usually make their name as a yin4zhang1, it is not a joke, yin4zhang1 usually is widely used in many official situation such as government's documents or drawings by famous artists, it is also widely used in the end of handwriting mails, so the writer doesn't have to write his/her name by hand. My English is not good you know, you can google Chinese seal for detailed information about yin4zhang1. zh.wikipedia.org also has an article about yin4zhang1 [3]. -- Yaohua2000 13:15, 2005 Mar 19 (UTC)
I am giving it up - I do not have enough of context. I only suggest not to use the word "name" here. As it is written now it suggests the Chinese name is real one and English variant is used as convenience transcription. Pavel Vozenilek 13:51, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Well, since he refers to it in his page's FAQ [4] as "[his] Chinese name, given to [him] in 1977 by Frances Yao", it's probably safe to assume it's legit, hmm? Or at least, as much so as we can get. - Dallan Invictus (no account yet), 02:33, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
I know but it sounds to me as one of his jokes. But I really do not know enough of context here. Pavel Vozenilek 19:26, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
Here is Preface to the Chinese Edition of TAOCP: Greetings to all readers of these books in China! I fondly hope that many Chinese computer programmers will learn to recognize my Chinese name Gao Dena, which was given to me by Francis Yao just before I visited your country in 1977. I still have very fond memories of that three-week visit, and I have been glad to see Gao Dena on the masthead of the Journal of Computer Science and Technology since 1989. This name makes me feel close to all Chinese people although I cannot speak your language. - Yaohua2000 08:56, 2005 May 17 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright question about the famous check

During Copyright examination of content possibly useful for the article, copyright status seemed to allow Wikipedia inclusion. Discussion can be read below. Note that this is not a final decision. The case could have been misinterpreted.

Wikipedia:Copyright problems takes care of possible copyright violations.

Since Don Knuth's famous reward checks are so well known, I thought it could be nice to have one attached to the article. Some images are linked from the page Knuth reward check, for example [5]; I can provide a scan of a check, remove the number and name and upload it, but I was wondering what the copyright status may be, since I imagine that the bank may claim a copyright on the printed check. Any idea ? Schutz 20:45, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

I haven't heard anything in over 2 months; I uploaded an image, with appropriate explanation and links, and will see what happens. Schutz 00:57, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Is it okay to publish the check with the electronic routing numbers and such un-obscured? I'm not sure, but doesn't that make it easy for someone to pilfer Knuth's checking account?

Actually, I have inverted and changed a few numbers before uploading the check ;-) It may have been easier to obscure them, indeed. Or maybe at least indicate the fact on the image page, which I will do. Schutz 18:28, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Copyright does not apply to blank forms, which includes checks. If you think the upload was from a legit source, I wouldnt worrry about the included content.DGG 05:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Do you have a reference about this which could be added to the article ? The upload is without doubt from a legit source. Schutz 09:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Here's an authority for this; Copyright Office regulation 202.1(c):
§ 202.1   Material not subject to copyright.
 The following are examples of works not subject to copyright
and applications for registration of such works cannot be 
entertained:
 . . .
  (c) Blank forms, such as time cards, graph paper, account 
books, diaries, bank checks, scorecards, address books, report
forms, order forms and the like, which are designed for
recording information and do not in themselves convey
information;

So there's no copyright in the check itself. The filling in of the information does not render it copyrightable either; that's just the operative facts of the date, amount, and signatory, which are not protected by copyright.

Terry Carroll 21:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia or humor ?

Mikkalai,

Sorry, but indeed, I don't 'get' how 3:16 Bible Texts Illuminated qualifies as humor. I could, as you wrote in your edit summary, live with this, but I'd rather have someone explain it to me. Everything else in this section I am happy to call 'humor'. Schutz 21:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

The humor is selection of the number 3:16. Why not 1:1 or "3:3"? Not to say that the phrase in question is not about the book, but about the bounty for errata. If it is not funny to you, it is your problem. mikka (t) 23:44, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
'T ain't funny, McGee. Problem solved.Lestrade 13:49, 22 March 2006 (UTC)Lestrade
Keep the humor! In a biography it makes part of the full picture of the person, but here it is not yet integrated into a fullness. The article contains good facts, but there's no full picture of the thinking of Knuth, except that he's alive/well and dealing with important mathematical aspects of programming (a minor, but fundamental part of it all). Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 18:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese name

That he has a Chinese name is interesting, but not really material for the top of the article. Where should it be moved to? -- Steven Fisher 15:04, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Nowhere, just remove it ? :) --Papadopa 08:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LR Parsing

Neither the page on LR-Parsing nor this one mentions that D. Knuth invented it. I found this a little surprising. Is it disputed, maybe? Is it not important enough to warrant mention on this article (in which case, it should probably be on the aforementioned LR-Parsing article)? I can't really stop by to discuss this, but I thought I'd bring it up in case it interested anyone. 81.109.92.212 01:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC) Ferret

[edit] LaTeX

Does Donald Knuth use LaTeX? And is there any opinions of TeX creator about LaTeX system?

Kefeer 10:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course not. He uses his own format, i.e. plain.--Oneiros 13:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvio

It would be nice if these tags had been discussed.

The phrasing on parts such as the finders' fee at first looks identical to that on the ACM page: however, that ACM page is marked as being (c) 2006, whereas the exact same phrasing appears on a four-year-old version of this page. I'm suspicious that the copying was in the other direction.

Without further evidence that this is really copyvio I'm inclined to remove these tags. Chris Cunningham 10:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

See also WP:ANI#Possible copyvio involving ACM and Wikipedia... but who copied who? Chris Cunningham 15:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jon Bentley

Jon Bentley was a student of Donald Knuth according to the Dr. Dobb's Excellence in Programming Award citation, 2000-04 [6]: "wrote his undergraduate paper ... under the direction of Donald E. Knuth". Roger Hui 16:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Surreal Numbers

I added a short paragraph on the book Surreal Numbers ISBN 0-201-03812-9. I thought it was enough different from Knuth's other works in that it is not computer related and deals only with pure math. The sentence about Knuth's intentions are based on comments in the post script. I didn't think it fit in particularly well where I put it, but I couldn't think of a better place for it.

Zzzzort 18:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Knuth vol4.jpg

Image:Knuth vol4.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DEK and Wikipedia

The sentence “Knuth is a fan of Wikipedia, but he's a bit leery of the concept, saying that he would not want to have to remain forever on guard after making technically complex contributions, lest his comments be badly reedited.” has been edited by Don himself on 2007-11-27T19:15:58. How does one make such an edit into a reference for the article?--Oneiros (talk) 14:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

  • How about putting a link http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Donald_Knuth&diff=174165164&oldid=173688749 to the diff between the version resulting from Knuth's edits and the previous version? Roger Hui (talk) 15:55, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
    • I am glad if Don Knuth really edited his entry and clarified his views on Wikipedia, but come on — a Stanford IP address claiming "I am Don Knuth" is not a reference by any standard, and definitively not according to Wikipedia:Verifiability. There is no way we can turn this information into a reference. In any case, this looks like a minor, self-referential point: his opinion about the many collaborative web sites does not really belong in this article. I'd say we keep the paragraph here on the talk page for internal reference and remove it from the article, solving the problem of reference at the same time. Schutz (talk) 08:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
      • I have a mail from Don's secretary account by him verifying this. You won't get more out of him.--Oneiros (talk) 11:07, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
        • I hear you, and I'm convinced that it is true, but it remains an uncitable source (it is not a published text or anything). If we had it in a published interview, for example, that would be ok. Schutz (talk) 21:12, 8 May 2008 (UTC)