Talk:Daniel Larsen (mathematician)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by 97198 (talk) 07:46, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that mathematician Daniel Larsen was the youngest contributor to The New York Times crossword puzzle? Source: The Youngest Crossword Constructor in New York Times History - The New York Times
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Raorchestes chalazodes
  • Comment: Article was moved from draftspace to mainspace in this edit.

Created by Silver seren (talk). Self-nominated at 00:04, 12 November 2022 (UTC).

• Drive-by comment: what makes him a mathematician? Looks like he's still a first-year student at MIT. DHN (talk) 04:44, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
  • He is published in the field of mathematics. I'm not using mathematician to mean he has a degree, but that he has academic research work in that field. People can be mathematicians (or any other field) and not have a degree in that field. Silverseren^C 04:47, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
    • Are we sure he is notable? Compare Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Scholze, which ended in "delete" :) —Kusma (talk) 18:14, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
      • Larsen meets GNG with significant coverage from major sources and not about one event and isn't trying to meet WP:PROF in the first place. Silverseren^C 18:20, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
• Hiya. The article was new enough at time of nomination (DYK nomination on 12 November, having been moved from draftspace on the 9th, and has not appeared on the Main Page) and is long enough (2369 characters of readable prose and is not a stub). The proposed hook has a slight issue. Although it is cited and is interesting to a broad audience, the age is not mentioned in the article. That usually wouldn't be too big an issue because 2017 − 2004 = 13, but issues below with the year of birth mean that it would be necessary. A quid pro quo was done. With regards to core content policies such as copyright, neutrality, and BLP, I did not detect any violations. However, there are some verifiability issues with the article:
  • The date of birth in the lead and in the category is unsourced, not in the rest of the article, and is wrong. The subject was 13 years and 4 months in February 2017, which should give him a 2003 year of birth.
  • The material on "shortening the lengths of Bertrand's postulate" isn't really in the article body.
  • The source wrote that he grew up in Bloomington, which is not the same as having been born there.
  • The material on the Regeneron search seems to be better supported by the "The Ups And Downs Of Daniel Larsen" source; perhaps you could cite it in tandem with the already-cited "How an Indiana high school student learned about himself through a mathematical discovery" source?
• As DYK eligibility requires additional work, I am marking the nomination with . Please address these issues before I can approve this nomination. As an aside (not related to whether this nomination passes or fails, of course), please try not to mix up asterisks and colons in discussions – mixing them up makes things difficult for those who use screen readers. Sdrqaz (talk) 01:17, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
  • Hi, Sdrqaz! I wasn't actually the one that added the DOB, but I've removed it now. I just extended the Quanta ref that covers that information to the lede, as I don't feel entirely confident in explaining the full math info from the news articles on the topic. I've changed the initial childhood sentence to say that he grew up in Bloomington. I've extended the Indianapolis Monthly reference to the Regeneron sentence. I hope that addresses everything! Silverseren^C 02:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
    • Hi, Silver. While you weren't the one to add the year of birth, you did add its equivalent category (which also needs to be removed, since it's unfortunately incorrect). Removing it from the lead is fine, but as I wrote above, the age at which Larsen got his crossword entry accepted needs to be in the article – that is required by rule 3b, as it is used in the hook. Also, as an MOS:LEAD thing, the lead should not have information that isn't in the article body – this is relatively minor and can be resolved by just copying what you have written in the lead to the body. Please remember what I said about asterisks – you just need to copy the previous line's indentation before adding your own at the end. Sdrqaz (talk) 12:46, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
      • Ah, the hook. My apologies, I forgot about that. I've fixed it now, with the removal of the "at 13" part. It was unnecessary anyways. I've also gone ahead and added the lede info into the body. Silverseren^C 23:15, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
        • Excellent – approved. Thank you, Sdrqaz (talk) 13:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Picture

The guy who added the picture of Larsen didn't write which lices it has. And if you look closely at the bottom of the picture, you'll see that it's written "WBIW.COM". Should we remove it? If so, what should we replace it with? Felixsj (talk) 09:11, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Probably should remove it, yes, I doubt it meets copyright requirements. Frequently for living people, we just don't have any photos that are in the public domain or otherwise available for use. Silverseren^C 17:35, 18 February 2023 (UTC)