Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:22, 9 October 2007

Sweden B‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden B This article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Chemistry B‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry B This article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Backwards List

Why does the list run backwards? -- Tarquin

• yeah, I was wondering that too... won't it be better if 2000's was on top? - Fiveless 13:19, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

I'd be nice to add the nationality of those people :-) - it is a basic information, though. --213.199.192.226 18:58, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

• I've added in the nationalities, i'm planning on adding stats at the bottom and possibly reformatting it later. Lemonysam 15:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

backwards

Yeah, descending would be much better than ascending. Put the most recent awards on top. --Michiel Sikma 17:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

I think it's subject to debate which is more appropriate, but, either way, all 5 lists would have to be reformatted if we were to decide on the other format. Talk about Big-O... EunuchOmerta 03:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

The other articles for Nobel Prize Laureates are listed differently (decade by decade). There probably should be a uniform type of organization.

• Personally i dislike the broken up tables format and the current ordering fits in with those of the other articles so i don't think it's necessary to change it Lemonysam 15:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

2001 B.Sharpless did not developed oxidation process, it was epoxidation!! Luis

Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2006 prediction

It would be nice if the Wiki community would be able to predict the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for 2006 (still several months to go), so if you think you know who will win, why not start a short bio and start an article on relevant research. Just an idea. V8rik 22:52, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

The Thomson 2006 shortlist (biochemical people not included): James Fraser Stoddart, Seiji Shinkai, George M. Whitesides, Kyriacos Costa Nicolaou, David A. Evans, Steven V. Ley and Tobin J. Marks see

V8rik 20:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

links

I've tried to make the subject links more relevant, but there is difficulty with the extremely broad wording of some of the prize statements (and the nature of some of the WP articles.) DGG 02:02, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Reformat

I think the format of the list of winners on the Nobel Prize in Economics is much better then this one. I would suggest a reformat for readability. Goodolclint 19:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

What is meant by nation?

The table lists the "nation" for each recipient. What does this mean?

• nationality at birth
• nationality at death (or current for living people)
• nationality at the time of the award
• nationality at the time of the research
• nation where the research was conducted
• nation where the recipient resided at the time of the award
• nation where the recipient died or lives currently
• etc...

It gets even more complicated when people have multiple nationalities. Perhaps the easy solution is just to copy the nation listed by nobelprize.org. In that case, there is at least one error in the table (Mario Molina). Itub 13:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Another discrepancy between this table and the one at nobelprize.org is Marie Curie. Itub 14:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Sortable table & nationalities

For the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, I changed the table into a sortable table and added a paragraph explaining the flags associated with each laureate's nationality. (As Itub pointed out, the country column is ambiguous.) The advantage of the sortable table is that it allows people to see the list from last to first, which has been a long-standing request. Someone may want to consider modifying the table on this page to something similar. panda 15:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

• Better not include nationality: it is nationalistic and an open invitation to heavy edit wars see for instance Vladimir Prelog. What Nobel prize winners seem have in common is their disregard for nationality, you see them move countries several times during their careers and in that sense they are true global citizens. Why not include other data in the table for instance the age of the winners when they received the award or gender or if you really have to place of birth (nations come and go but places tend to last) V8rik 17:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome to add age, gender, and whatever else you may find interesting to the table -- it's just a lot of work since you have to add it for everyone in the table. The names of cities/towns can change throughout its history and you would need to research & include the name changes. But if you'd like to add that info, go for it. Regarding nationality, I meant someone's country of citizenship. Nationality and country of citizenship are not really the same thing -- countries change but nationalities/ethnicities may not. In the case of Vladimir Prelog, according to his autobiography on the Nobel website, his countries of citizenships would be Austria-Hungary, Yugoslavia (1918), and Switzerland (1959). This should avoid edit wars about whether or not he was Croatian -- he can be Croatian even if he was never a citizen of the country of Croatia. For examples of laureates with multiple citizenships, take a look at the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. panda 05:56, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

• No I was not volunteering for work just offering a suggestion. I like to focus on the underlying chemistry connected with nobel prizes The femtosecond spectroscopy article for the 1999 Nobel prize still needs to be written! Are wikipedians incompetent or was the award a big mistake!. City names rarely change! (exception: stalingrad, Peking). Why is Bernard Katz (1970) in Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine listed with country of citizenship Nazi Germany (complete with swastika flag)! Being born in 1911 why not throw in the German Empire and the Weimar republic? he was born in Leipzig and Leipzig still exists so that would be a safe choice. V8rik 20:37, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the other items you would like added to the table or changed in Misplaced Pages, it may be more helpful to create your own "wish list" subsection on this talk page since those who may be interested in making those changes may not read this tread. As stated previously, there is "a paragraph explaining the flags associated with each laureate's nationality" in Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. If you still do not understand why a flag was chosen after reading the paragraph, please let me know which part of the paragraph you did not understand so that I can update it. Thanks! panda 21:54, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Herbert Brown

Why is HC Brown listed as United Kingdom? I'm holding off on editing the article until someone knows for sure, but he did all his Nobel related work in the United States. Having the list organized by nation of birth doesn't really make sense, does it? EagleFalconn 03:08, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

It was probably a mistake by someone. Has been updated. panda 03:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Country of record

this article (Nobel Prize in Chemistry) is about the award ~not~ the laureate per se. the country is and should be the country of record as reported by the Nobel Foundation at the time conferred. otherwise, relative to this article, the column has no real meaning. --emerson7 | Talk 18:14, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

The "Country" column currently has no meaning and your insistence that it remain so is unfounded. The Nobel Foundation only states "Titles, data and places given above refer to the time of the award." It doesn't state what the country means, and as stated previously by Itub on this talk page, it is not clear what it is for. Please take the time to read what others have commented on this before taking a stand on something that you don't appear to have a good understanding of. I can give multiple examples of how the country has an ambiguous meaning (country of citizenship, country of residence, and a country that has no relationship to the time of the award), one of which is already mentioned on your talk page. panda 20:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

i don't see how you can read something, and completely ignore the contents thereof. "Titles, data and places given above refer to the time of the award." that's really completely self-explanatory. were we to follow your logic, 'country' should be eliminated altoghter as it is otherwise irrelevant to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emerson7 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I am attempting to clarify what the country column means in this article, not to remove it.

• The Nobel sites makes no claim as to what the country means, it only states place at the time of the award. What does the place mean then? Country of residence?
• You have already written on my talk page "i would presume Country is laureates nationality at the time of award", which I've already shown is incorrect on your talk page.
• Itub has on this talk page given several interpretations for what the country can mean, in addition to examples of errors in the Nobel site's info.

What additional evidence do you need to understand that the country column in this article and the country info on the Nobel site is ambiguous? If you let me know, I'll provide the evidence.

–panda 21:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

RFC: Country – ambiguous or not

There is currently a dispute about whether the country column in the table of this article (and related tables in the Nobel Prize articles) and the country info on the Nobel Foundation website is: (1) not ambiguous or (2) ambiguous.

Statements demonstrating that "country" is not ambiguous:

• Emerson7 states "Country is laureates nationality at the time of award as indicated on the website." Rationale is "the nobel site indicates 'Titles, data and places given above refer to the time of the award.'" (contributed at 23:54, 29 August 2007 and 02:02, 30 August 2007 on my talk page)

Statements demonstrating that "country" is ambiguous in the Misplaced Pages Nobel Prize articles:

• Itub has in this talk page listed at least 7 different interpretations for what the country could mean. (contributed at 13:59, 20 February 2007; see #What is meant by nation?)

• Talk:Nobel Prize in Physics#Otto Stern also has a question about what the flag/country means: "What do the flags in front of the winners names mean? Are they the current flag in the contry where the scientist is living?" (contributed by 84.140.149.198 10:48, 23 June 2007)

• Talk:Nobel Prize in Economics#Country also has a question about what the country means: "In regards to the country that is beside each Nobel laureates name; is it the country in which they were born in or where they completed there work?" (contributed by Canking 19:33, 20 April 2007)

Statements demonstrating that "country" is ambiguous on the Nobel site. As a reminder, the Nobel site states "Titles, data and places given above refer to the time of the award." (See the bottom of , for example)

• Evidence that "country" means country of citizenship: See the majority of the entries. This may also just be coincidence as most people lived in the country that they were citizens of at the time of the award.

• Evidence that "country" means country of residence: The Nobel website gives Canada as the country for John James Richard Macleod (1923). He lived in Canada at the time of the award but Canadians claim that he is not Canadian. (From the University of Toronto news: "In October 1923, it was announced that Banting and Macleod had been awarded the Nobel Prize in Medicine. Banting was incensed that he was to share the prize with Macleod and not with Best, and had to be dissuaded from turning it down. He was the first Canadian to win a Nobel prize.")

• Evidence that "country" means country of (citizenship at) birth: The Nobel website gives Austria as the country for Bertha von Suttner (1905). Bertha von Suttner was born in the Austrian Empire and at the time of the award (1905), Austria did not exist. Instead, it was known as Austria-Hungary or The Austro-Hungarian Empire.

• Evidence that "country" does not mean country: Bertha von Suttner can fall is this category as well. Another example: the Nobel website gives Norway as the country for Bjørnstjerne Martinus Bjørnson (1903). Norway was not independent from Sweden until 1905.

Suggestion: Clarify what is meant by "Country" in the Nobel Prize tables by instead using the label "Country of Citizenship".

–panda 15:08, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

indeed, my original assumption was based on the halve-dozen or so sample i took from the list. it's apparent to me know that 'country' is most likely an indicator where the work was done. either way, the 'suggestion' you make to arbitrarily use country of citizenship is inappropriate in 'this' article. as i indicated early, this article is 'not' about the individual laureates, but the award. the country as given by the nobel foundation, whether ambiguous or not, is part of their official citation. to simply ignore it is rather silly, but to put redefine, or substitute one's own idea what should be there instead, is akin to academic dishonesty. if the nobel foundation citation is indeed, itself ambiguous, it is not up to wikipaedia to disambiguate the citation for them. it should be reported as it is however ambiguous it may be. --emerson7 | Talk 21:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Comment - I see two solutions: 1) remove the column from the table; or 2) call it "country" and add a footnote stating "this is the country listed by nobelprize.org, and it refers to the time of the award" (and of course, make sure that our list matches the official one). Doing our own research and judgment about what the True Country for a person is violates WP:OR. --Itub 09:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Adding someone's country of citizenship based on another source is not WP:OR. WP:OR states "Original research (OR) is a term used in Misplaced Pages to refer to unpublished facts, arguments, concepts, statements, or theories. ... Material that counts as 'original research' within the meaning of this policy is material for which no reliable source can be found and which is therefore believed to be the original thought of the Wikipedian who added it." Citizenship can be found in other published, reliable sources and references can be given.

The question is whether the country info should remain ambiguous or not. If it should remain ambiguous, then all of the Nobel pages should be affected by this decision, not just this article. Furthermore, you then have a question about what flag to include or to remove all flags altogether as several laureates are listed with a country that didn't exist at the time of the award (which doesn't make any sense as the Nobel site states "Titles, data and places given above refer to the time of the award.")

The main problem with all of the Nobel articles is that people keep changing the country, since many laureates have had multiple citizenships. Also no one seems to be offering to check on the country data for all of the laureates.

–panda 19:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

whatever the ambiguity you might see, to arbitrarily change the article as you propose serves only to pollute the historical significance, and intent of the nobel foundation. moreover, as it relates to this particular article, the current citizenship status of each individual laureate in completely irrelevant. once editors understand the source of the data, there will be no problem maintaining the article's integrity and accuracy. --emerson7 | Talk 01:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Of course, just looking up the country (or countries) of citizenship of someone at a given point in time is not OR. But choosing the "best" country that should be listed on the table for the complicated cases is what gives trouble and can arguably be an "original synthesis". It is a very fertile ground for nationalistic claims. For examples, see Marie Curie (we have her as Polish, while nobelprize.org has her as French) and Mario Molina (we have him as Mexican, while nobelprize.org has him as American). --Itub 09:26, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

That's why I'm in favor of posting all of the citizenships someone has had rather than only one country. If there is only one country listed per multi-national laureate, in practice you can't prevent everyone from changing a multi-national laureate's country all of the time. However, if you post all of the citizenships someone has had, there's no longer any reason to change it (especially if the countries are cited), and the list should become more stable than it is today. panda 10:42, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

again, this is an historical document in that it is a reflection of "what was" at a specific point in time. citizenship subsequent to the award is irrelevant. as i've stated before, and i believe one other person has stated, the country of record should reflect the that of the the nobel foundation, or it should be removed altogether. i favour the former. --emerson7 | Talk 13:33, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Panda has asked me to respond to the question of whether the country is ambiguous or not. I thought I had implicitly answered it already, but here it goes. Yes, I think the country is ambiguous. But no, I don't think renaming it to "country of citizenship" will help. In part, because citizenship is often an accidental fact of people's lives with no real relevance. But mostly because the solution I advocate is to simply use the country listed by the Nobel Foundation, which might not be the country of citizenship (it is a bit ambiguous too, as has been mentioned already). Just add a footnote saying "the country given on the table is the one listed by the Nobel Foundation and it applies to the time of the award". Let the readers come to their own conclusions. --Itub 07:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Summary: There appears to be consensus that the country is ambiguous. What to do about the country will be the topic of the next RFC, which hopefully more editors can be involved with. panda 14:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

whether intentional or not, your synthesis of the preceding discussion is misleading. while it is true that the formula used by the nobel foundation for their declaration of country is unclear, the consensus was that the article should nevertheless reflect that declaration. most notably, the sole dissent was yours. --emerson7 | Talk 16:25, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Just for the record, only 3 people responded to this RFC, which was left open for 2 weeks. All 3 agreed that the country info is ambiguous, which is what the RFC asked. For how to deal with the ambiguous country info, 2 felt that the list should only include the countries listed on the Nobel site and 1 felt that the country should be named "country of citizenship". Since the problem of what to do with the country column is a larger problem than just if the info is ambiguous or not, a new RFC has been created to discuss that question with hopefully a larger number of editors. panda 17:44, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

...that's much better. cheers! --emerson7 | Talk 17:54, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

RFC: Country data in Nobel lists

Template:RFChist

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Misplaced Pages contributors. Misplaced Pages has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

This RFC is intended for editors to come to a consensus about what to do with the country info in the Nobel lists. The country data has been ambiguous (see #RFC: Country – ambiguous or not) and several editors have tried different methods of presenting the information in the different lists. It would be better, however, if everyone could decide on a uniform way of dealing with the country info for all of the Nobel lists to avoid edit wars. Below is a presentation of all the options that have been suggested so far. (Feel free to add to the list if your suggestion is not represented below.)

Part 1: To keep the country or not

1. Remove the country data completely. It is nationalistic and an open invitation to heavy edit wars.
2. Only list the countries shown on the Nobel site. Call it "country" and add a footnote stating "this is the country listed by nobelprize.org, and it refers to the time of the award". What exactly the country refers to (country of residence, citizenship, or something else) is left unstated. Let the readers come to their own conclusions.
3. Clarify the country data: call it country of citizenship and include all citizenships. Most people assume the country means country of citizenship anyway and notice when a specific nationality is not listed, resulting in changes in the tables.
3b. Only include citizenships held up to the award of the Prize.

If consensus is to keep the country data:

Part 2: To keep the flags or not

1. Remove the flags completely. Flags have changed throughout the years making it unclear which flag to use.
2. Keep the flags. This option needs to be further defined depending on what country data is kept.

Part 3. Which country name to use

1. Only use the most common name. For example, all variants of Germany (German Empire, Weimar Republic, etc) are called Germany.
2. Only use the names shown on the Nobel site regardless of whether or not the country listed actually existed at the time of the award.
3. Use the common name for a country that actually existed and use time specific names for countries. For example, Austria-Hungary is called Austria-Hungary and not Austria, and all of the specific variants of Germany are used, e.g., German Empire, Weimar Republic, etc.

Part 4. What is the purpose of the Nobel lists?

As this may help the above decisions, what do you feel is the purpose of the Nobel lists?

1. To be a duplicate of the Nobel website. Repeat the same information that is found on nobelprize.org, regardless of whether or not it is unclear what the information means.
2. To not necessarily be a duplicate of the Nobel website. List the Nobel laureates + rationale + non-ambiguous information.

–panda 15:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Rationale please: Just a reminder that RFCs are not votes but a discussion, so please include a rationale with your comment. panda 05:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - I agree to #2 in part 1, and #1 in the rest. DHN 19:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - Use country from nobelprize.org and remove flags. Either use the most common name or the name shown on the website. Regarding question 4, I'm not sure I understand the scope of the question. Regarding countries, I think we should duplicate the information. But in general, I'm open to consider listing other information on the table. My rationale regarding the countries is that a person's "country" is too complicated to reduce to a table cell, so if we want to include it we should at least attribute it to an authoritative source. More information should be given in detail and with appropriate qualifications in the biographic article about the person. The flags are complicated for similar reasons, especially when you get to controversial ones such as the Nazi flag. --Itub 08:32, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

In short: 1.2, 2.1, 3.1 or 3.2, and no reply to question 4. Please correct me if I misinterpreted. –panda 04:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - #2, #2, #1, #2. I agree that we should use the info from nobelprize.org and make it clear on the site - although many laureates are multicultural, all of the lists are in the context of the Nobel Prize at the time awarded (similar to the manner that authors of scientific papers are credited with only their institutions at the time of research/publication). Flags are, I think, a useful visual cue and I'd like to keep them with country names found on the site. If we can't come to a large-scale accord, then remove them completely. I'd like to wholeheartedly applaud Itub's comment that nationalities are "too complicated to reduce to a table cell." While the article is not 100% a duplicate of the Nobel site, let readers be directed to articles dealing with individual laureates if they want to know more about citizenship, birth country, and influences. It's not up to us to make that distinction, regardless of our own personal convictions. Irregulargalaxies 16:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

• Comment Part I option 1. Instead focus on the actual science behind the prize. Although I do realize that people like Panda have put much effort in mainting these tables and moderating this discussion. V8rik 19:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. I recomend Part 1 option 2, and then option 1 for the other parts. --Metropolitan90 16:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
• Comment
  1. I recommend Part 1 option 3; some of these are too complex to be summarized by one country, and we don't have to. I would in fact go further and include all reasonably common claims (see WP:UNDUE).
  2. Remove the flags, which are pointless and arguable; and consult WP:Flag. Use the most common name for a country, in accordance with WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NCGN; this is not the place to explain such complications.
  3. In particular, make the Germans either Germany (or, for 1945-1991, West Germany - were there any East German laureates?)
  4. Of course this need not be a duplicate of the Nobel website; if we were doing that, a link would be better.
  • Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:49, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
• Comment
  1. Strongly support Part 1.3: it is simple and unambiguous, and corresponds to what people would naturaly assume. Strongly oppose Part 1.2, which would result in major incongruities: e.g. Max Born, who was German and did all his prize-winning research in Germany, would only be listed as British.
     • A suggested ammendment to Part 1.3: only include citizenships held up to the award of the Prize. Thus Einstein needn't be listed as American, since he received his prize in 1921.
  2. No strong preferences otherwise (apart from Part 4.2, of course), though I do think the flags are pretty. -Udzu 10:44, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

• After watching the Nobel Prize articles, I noticed an edit by an anon on 28 September 2007 to Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, where the edit summary states "He was Indian when he did the work for which he recieved the prize". (The Nobel site states USA and another editor reverted the edit based on that.) So there appears to be at least two cases of this. –panda 05:00, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

• Clarification & Questions related to 3.1 or 3.2
  • 3.1: Changing all variants of Germany to "Germany" would mean that even West Germany should be labeled "Germany".
  • 3.2: The Nobel site differentiates between Germany (up to 1945, example: 1910, 1932, 1944) and Federal Republic of Germany (after 1945, examples: 1964, 1991, 1995), where Federal Republic of Germany refers to West Germany or present day Germany. (There are no instances of anyone from East Germany winning the Nobel prize.) So 3.1 and 3.2 are not the same end result.
  • Q: Should the wikilink for countries be removed? If not, which version of Germany should be linked to?

–panda 06:22, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Comment. I have no strong opinion about this, but my personal preference would be to call it Germany and link to Germany. If there were any laureates from East Germany, it would be a bit more complicated, but history spared us from having to worry about that. --Itub 13:56, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

My weak preference would be to follow contemporary usage, and call it West Germany; we are talking, at least in part, about citizenship, so Germany is probably too simple. Federal Republic of Germany is high formal, and would imply using the formal names of other states, such as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, duly switching at 1922; this seems pointless. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Germany has a unified country with a shared language and history for much of the time during which the Nobels have been awarded. Federal Republic of Germany is certainly too wordy, and I would vote for West Germany for the period in which it existed if that's the consensus. I feel, however, that using simply Germany is acceptable (since there's no chance of confusion for East German laureates). As with other aspects to this discussion, I favor a less-is-more approach - give the simplest ID we can agree on and let readers go to the detailed biography articles if they want more information. Irregulargalaxies 17:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

• What about the wikilinks? Should they be removed? Which version of Germany should they link to? –panda 18:41, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. I haven't read the entirety of this post, in part because it seems a bit unnecessarily complex, but FWIW, the way it's presented for people with two countries of origin looks sloppy. Specifically, I was prompted by the list on Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for the most recent recipients - it made me do a double-take, because the way the wiki-text and flags are presented is confusing. Maybe just the flags next to their names (cf. athlete, actor, etc. infoboxes) with a / separating the two countries? Although then of course the question is which flags, on which I don't have strong feelings either way. Luatha 04:04, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

• Unless someone can come up with a good way to decide which flag to use, then the current consensus will be to remove the flags. I came up with a scheme for the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine but there's been at least one editor who objected to that version. Another suggestion? (Only using flags instead of the text may not be a good idea partly because it can be difficult to determine which country a small flag represents, partly because they make accessibility a problem for those using screen readers. See WP:FLAG for more.) –panda 04:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

• Country data defined. For those interested, I've discovered that the country data listed on the Nobel Foundation website is supposed to be nationality, according to the 1st edition of Nobel: The Man and His Prizes (1950). Prior to this publication, I have not found any publication by the Nobel Foundation that lists the nationality of any of the laureates (e.g., the yearbooks, Les Prix Nobel, do not state a laureate's nationality). This would kind of explain why Germany is only called Germany -- they're all Germans regardless of what state Germany was in. I don't know if this helps any but I strongly believe that errors in the Nobel Foundation list shouldn't be reproduced here. (Some past errors have been fixed but not all, e.g., Einstein was only listed with Germany in the 1st and 2nd editions but today is listed with both Germany and Switzerland.) –panda 05:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

this page loads slowly.......

I am pretty broadband but I am experiencing loading difficulties. Reason: the flag images are too big. Can this be remedied? Thanks in advance V8rik 20:08, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

• The flags are from standard templates. Looking at the comments in #RFC: Country data in Nobel lists, the consensus is moving towards removing the flags, which may then help speed up the loading time. –panda 05:00, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

• B-Class Sweden articles
• Unknown-importance Sweden articles
• All WikiProject Sweden pages
• B-Class Chemistry articles
• High-importance Chemistry articles
• WikiProject Chemistry articles