Talk:Roger Myerson

Jewish scientists category
I been told by Relata refero, which constantly deleted the category above from the article, that I should cite a source in which Roger Myerson  refer to himself as Jewish if I want to add the Jewish scientists category. I didn't find such a source yet (neither did I find an opposite source) - what do you think to be the best solution?--Gilisa 14:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Leave the categorization out for now. Continue your research until you can find a source that meets with the provisions of WP:BLP.  Good luck. Blueboar 14:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! But I think that the problem with the WP:BLP is only if considering Jewishness as religion only- and customary Jewishness is also an ethnic matter- when facing with one's religious identity, a satnding for the identity by his\her side is required. but when we are talking about ethnic identity Categorization of people don’t ( and )  require such a statement-but I can be wrong.--Gilisa 16:58, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep it. Jewishness is first and foremost an ethnical issue. This belongs in the Jewish Scientists category. By the way, Jewish is NOT a religion. Judaism is. Wikipedia should be secular anyway.

Photo
Request for photo sent to [mailto:myerson@uchicago.edu]. --Zureks 18:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

deleted Jewish
I don't see any reason why the fact tha Myerson is Jewish should appear in the preamble. I don't see any reason why this "quality" affects in a relevant way the reason why he is on Wikipedia.

Of course, that this fact is quoted in the body of his biography, seems natural to me. --Fioravante Patrone en 12:30, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Gilisa, merely giving a speech given at Beth Emet does not count as self-identification. (There is no mention of his background in the speech.) Robert Putnam is speaking there next Friday, and he is true-blue WASP. I'm removing the cat etc. again.
 * Also, at Harvard, one receives an A.B., not a B.A. Relata refero 17:02, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

But here i have managed to source it in (http://www.israel-times.com/index.php/business/2007/10/roger-myerson-2007-nobel-prize-in-economics-3204/) there is no reason to remove it.


 * OK. I didnt knew that (the A.B issue). Any way, he said at the end of his speach (here: )that "..And next fall, at Yom Kippur, we should ask how we can atone for the evil". I think that you missed this line - which clearly wont came out of non-Jewish or even from a Jew which dont consider himself as such. Any way, we can also send him a question via e-mail if it takes, but I think that it's not needed as he is 1. clearly a Jew 2. clearly self identified Jew. So there is realy no reason to delete the Jewish Scientist Category from the article-for now I'm waiting to hear what other users think.--Gilisa 17:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * As I said about the Israel Times article in my edit comment, it is clearly an (unattributed) copy of an earlier version of this article, and so can hardly be used as a source. About the exact quote from the speech, he says "We should all try to learn more about the impact of our nation's invasion of Iraq, the good that our forces did, and the evil. And next fall, at Yom Kippur, we should ask how we can atone for the evil", it certainly seems to me that he is speaking in this case as an American, and one who appreciates the significance of the day of atonement, which is not uncommon. Consider, for example, the philosopher George David Miller, who is not Jewish nor from a Jewish family, in the preface to his 2002 book. Or President Clinton, who too uses "we" in reference to Yom Kippur. Elsewhere in the same draft Myerson, who lives in Evanston, Ill, the location of the synagogue, clearly implies he is not part of that congregation. I think this does not meet the test of self-identification. As I said, if he does not care to clearly self-identify, BLP enjoins on us the duty to respect his wishes. Relata refero 20:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn’t cite Israel Times so you are answering the wrong person on that matter. I have to say that I totally disagree with you about the Yom Kippur issue (and I know very well that in several occasions non-Jews talked about Yom Kippur as like it was part of their own cultural heritage- but they always end up with good wishes to the Jewish community, implying that they are talking about Yom Kippur, or Purim or Chanukah and etc as a representatives of the non Jewish Americans-which is appreciated). Any way, as you may noticed, I'm not the only one which mentioned Myerson as Jewish and so it's not an easy refutable or an un based claim. However, I do respect the WP rules on BLP even if I'm not always agree with-and so, for now, until there is an other evidence for the Myerson's  self-identification (and usually, after receiving a noble prize, one would give many interviews) I wont add this category- but if other users would think that the source I gave is enough, than I would  add the cat as well, as WP rules allows.--Gilisa 11:26, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * You guys are funny. It's not that big of a deal if he is put in the Jewish Scientist Category or not, but in case you were curious, I can verify with 100% certainty that he identifies himself as a Jew. I know his family personally. He also does not live in Evanston - he lives in Wilmette. I know all of this falls under WP:OR, but it seems to me that there is ample evidence to verify that he is Jewish anyways - giving a speech at Yom Kippur and referring to the congregation as "we" appears to be significant enough to me.  But, it really makes no difference if he's put in the Jewish Scientists category anyways, in my opinion. He used to belong to Beth Emet when I went there 10 years ago, so I can't say for sure if he is still a member of that particular congregation, but I see no reason to suspect otherwise. -Bluedog423Talk 15:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, Bluedog423 is correct. He is a Jew. I have verified it. Masterpiece2000 (talk) 10:25, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

about Myerson and "Nobel prize"
About the interventions of SecretaryNotSure on the appropriate name to mention the Bank of Sweden Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel (aka "Nobel Prize in Economics"):

saying that "the consensus is..." (can you "prove" this statement?) is quite different from saying "nonsense" about a statement which is simply true.

Please use more appropriate words in the "edit summary", next time, with due respect for the interventions of other contributors (and I am not referring to myself!). --Fioravante Patrone en 05:45, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 14:37, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Applied mathematics?
The Mathematics Genealogy Project states (http://www.genealogy.math.ndsu.nodak.edu/id.php?id=99809) that Myerson completed his PhD under Kenneth Arrow (of Arrow's Paradox fame) in game theory, which is not considered part of applied mathematics - probably "the mathematical theory of economics" would be a better description. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.213.38 (talk) 14:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Foundation
"Roger Myerson, a game theorist at the University of Chicago who won the Nobel in economic science two years ago, gave a copy of “Foundation” to the Nobel Museum in Stockholm to commemorate the inspiration he took from Asimov’s books." --Gwern (contribs) 10:06 22 August 2009 (GMT)