Talk:Friedrich Hayek

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

what needs to be mentioned[edit]

1. v Hayek was no anarcho-capitalist but is often used as a source of inspiration of them

2. v Hayek opposed the foundation of the copyright and the patent system

3. Hayek's influence on economist Milton Friedman who wrote introductions to The Road to Serfdom for both a 1971 German edition and the fiftieth anniversary edition

The article says: "In a typically bold insight, Hayek attributed the birth of civilization to private property in his book The Fatal Conceit (1988)."

This point was made much earlier by both Locke and Rousseau. Also "typically bold insight" is not very NPOV.

Agree, it was also made even earlier by Aristoteles, restated by thomas Aquinas, and a large etc. Although at the time Hayek was writing, it certainly was quite bold.

The Hayek page has a significant markup problem[edit]

...which I have not been able to figure out. Three [edit] links do not appear where they should, and then all three appear together in the wrong place. Help!

"The Road to Serfdom"[edit]

This section merely trumpets the book's reception, but doesn't say one fucking word about the contents. WTF??? 2607:FEA8:BFA0:BD0:982F:2CEE:3C32:5FD6 (talk) 22:35, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Friedrich Hayek vs. Friedrich August von Hayek[edit]

The article was apparently written under the lemma Friedrich von Hayek and later transferred to Friedrich Hayek. The reason may be the error that the Austrian law on names applies to him.

Friedrich August von Hayek was born in Austria under this name, was renamed Friedrich August Hayek in 1919 by the Austrian law of abolition of nobility, emigrated before the Nazis and became a British citizen in 1938 under the name Friedrich August von Hayek (source in the article).

He is listed under this name at his places of activity (including the Austrian University of Salzburg) and received the Nobel Prize and the Decoration of Honour for Services to the Republic of Austria as Friedrich August von Hayek. The article should therefore be moved to "Friedrich August von Hayek". Agree? --Ganescha (talk) 10:47, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

He's most commonly called "Friedrich Hayek" in English-language usage, so I'd be inclined to leave it where it is - David Gerard (talk) 14:02, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello David, what leads you to this impression? I found a Google research somewhere in this article's archive with the opposite result. Also in the Library of Congress [1] and all other libraries in the English speaking world he is catalogued with his full name [2]. --Ganescha (talk) 14:55, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
Casual Googling finds mostly "Freidrich Hayek" or "Freidrich A. Hayek", with some "F.A. Hayek". Maybe it's just my filter bubble - David Gerard (talk) 17:48, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
The Google query wasn't really my point. Besides, after almost a decade with the lemma "Friedrich Hayek" on Wikipedia this is no real surprise. At June 2nd, 2010 the article was moved to "Friedrich Hayek" with the justification that the full name was illegal in Austria. We now know that this is not right. Hayek was a British citizen for most of his academic career. The Austrian law is not applicable an even the Austrian president used "Friedrich August von Hayek" when he honoured him. More importantly the name "Friedrich August von Hayek" is internationally used in the academic world as you can easily see in the library catalogues and the name used by the Nobel Price Committee. The English-speaking world is no exception here. To do the crosscheck: Is there any evidence beyond Google that the name "Friedrich Hayek" is dominant in the English-speaking scientific world? --Ganescha (talk) 20:52, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
There's no reason he'd show up in the English-speaking scientific world - he wasn't a scientist. I just looked at mises.org and they seem to name him as "Friedrich Hayek" or "F. A. Hayek" - David Gerard (talk) 00:18, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
There's no right answer. The Friedrich August von Hayek Institut is at [3] not von-hayek-institut.at Pelirojopajaro (talk) 08:40, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
David, I am not sure why Hayek shouldn't have been a scientist. Maybe you refer to the attitude that political science was no science and only natural science is. The Webster tells otherwise [4].
The Mises Institute indeed is a point.
I tried to go a little bit deeper in the subject. And, Pelirojopajaro, you are right. Hayek published under almost any variation of his name. The Friedrich-August-v.-Hayek-Institut uses the brand Hayek-Institut and the web domain hayek-institut.de. The University of Chicago refers to him as "F.A. Hayek" [5] as well as "Friedrich von Hayek" [6], while F.A. Hayek" is used significantly more often. The London School of Economics is using "Friedrich von Hayek" [7].
I already was inclined to say that Americans with their practical sense tend to use the shorter form. Yet also the Library of Congress catalogues him under his full name "Friedrich August von Hayek" [8]. Under this name he became a British citizen [9], it was probably written in his passport and the name under which he won the Nobel Price (or to avoid another dissent the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences)[10]. So I would keep stating that "Friedrich August von Hayek" is the correct lemma in the English Wikipedia as well.--Ganescha (talk) 11:46, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
The word "economist" isn't normally regarded as a subcategory of the English word "scientist". If you want to argue that it should be, this talk page isn't the place to make that point.
You seem to have a point that you very much want to insist upon, and don't seem very interested in discussion or allowing for or engaging with countervailing evidence - David Gerard (talk) 15:08, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, if I should have offended you. So far I have found the discussion to be constructive, even if we have not reached consensus. At least the arguments are on the table. Shall we look for a 30? --Ganescha (talk) 17:50, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

As requested for a Third Opinion I try to summarise the status of our discussion. The the reason (purported legal regulations) why this article was moved in 2010 from "Friedrich August von Hayek" to "Friedrich Hayek" actually never existed. Hayek became British citizen in 1938 under his full name. I suggested that it should be moved back to "Friedrich August von Hayek". Usually the most common name should be the name of the article. David and I disagree what is the most common name in the English speaking world. If you ask Google it clearly is "Friedrich Hayek". In the academic world in the contrary "Friedrich August von Hayek" as he is internationally catalogued in almost every library under this name and was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. Hayek himself used almost all variations of his name. David Gerard, would you like to add something? --Ganescha (talk) 14:27, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Attempting to relitigating the move ten years ago on the basis that you think the reason was bogus is not an argument to be found at WP:COMMONNAME, which says: Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources) as such names will usually best fit the five criteria listed above.

The criteria are: Recognizability, Naturalness, Precision, Conciseness, Consistency. See the page for fuller details. "Friedrich Hayek" meets these.

Looking in Reliable Sources, per WP:COMMONNAME - googling '"hayek" site:ft.com' turns up a few "Friedrich von Hayek", but it's mostly "Friedrich Hayek". '"hayek" site:nytimes.com' shows a few more "von", but still mostly without. '"hayek" site:wsj.com' shows a few "von", but overwhelmingly without "von".

To quote WP:COMMONNAME:

The following are examples of the application of the concept of commonly used names in support of recognizability:
People

"Friedrich August von Hayek" is indeed his full name, but it's not a form that showed up with any frequency in the Reliable Sources.

So I think it's pretty clear that, if we go by WP:COMMONNAME, the main title should probably be without "von" - David Gerard (talk) 15:03, 19 January 2020 (UTC) 

My 3O filing was declined as the admin saw more than two involved editors. So I will open a Request for Comment.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganescha (talk • contribs) 17:43, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

RfC Friedrich Hayek vs. Friedrich August von Hayek[edit]

Please find the summaries of the discussion in the section above as David and I have prepared them for a 30. I am looking forward to your feedback.--Ganescha (talk) 17:46, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Without the "von". Looking in Reliable Sources, per WP:COMMONNAME - googling '"hayek" site:ft.com' turns up a few "Friedrich von Hayek", but it's mostly "Friedrich Hayek". '"hayek" site:nytimes.com' shows a few more "von", but still mostly without. '"hayek" site:wsj.com' shows a few "von", but overwhelmingly without "von". "Friedrich August von Hayek" is indeed his full name, but it's not a form that showed up with any frequency in the Reliable Sources. So I think it's pretty clear that, if we go by WP:COMMONNAME, the main title should probably be without "von". WP:COMMONNAME is a policy - a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS via RFC can't override it - David Gerard (talk) 19:22, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
    • We should not carry on with our discussion and wait for input instead. Yet just for clarification. We both agree, that the common name should be used. We do disagree whether to consult Google or look into the academic world. By the way, Rowling is catalogued in the Library of Congress under J. K. Rowling. No contradiction. Now I am silently waiting for comments. --Ganescha (talk) 11:59, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
      • Apart from this being the comment as to which version matches policy - there's no reason not to set out the applicable policy, and note that you can't declare an RFC to set a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS in violation of policy. Please review WP:LOCALCONSENSUS - David Gerard (talk) 15:02, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
  • It seems to me that WP:COMMONNAME should be applied to general WP:RS and not to industry use. No move seems necessary from here.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:47, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Since David and I started the discussion, we have not been discussing whether or not to use the Common Name, but what the correct "Common Name" is. So I don't know why David brought up the "Local Consensus" issue. A look at WP:RS furthermore shows that academic sources ("Scholarship") are to a certain extent the gold standard among sources. Therefore, the use in academic libraries is preferable to the use in Google. By the way, even the examples listed under "Common Name" such as "Bill Clinton" or "J.K. Rowling" are catalogued internationally under these names. Librarians orientate themselves by the names on the publications. And in the case of Hayek it is simply predominantly "Friedrich August von Hayek". --Ganescha (talk) 11:11, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
TonyTheTiger, In this context, may I ask you to have another look at this? First of all, I do not understand what you mean by "industry use". --Ganescha (talk) 11:16, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
What it says - David Gerard (talk) 19:59, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
By industry use, I mean referring to academic journals. The fact that academic journals are the gold standard for the content of the page does not mean they are the gold standard for the name of the page. E.g., I know if I published in academic journals, I would publish under Antonio, but anyone who knows me calls me Tony. Common name is a different thing than determining the academic referrent.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:30, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
I suspect Ganescha's confusion is in attempting to apply something rather more like German Wikipedia rules (note use of the term "lemma" for article title) - and not understanding that the English Wikipedia rule is quite different. (e.g., en:Chrislo Haas v. de:Christian Haas (Musiker) - probably nobody except his mother ever called him "Christian".) - David Gerard (talk) 07:14, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for this clarification. In fact Common Name and Reliable Sources are not really different from their equivalents in the German Wikipedia. What is different seems to be the common understanding of how they are to be applied. Hayek might have liked this. :-) --Ganescha (talk) 13:17, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Friedrich_Hayek&oldid=961325238"