Jump to content

Talk:Andrew Wiles

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"এণ্ড্ৰিউ ৱাইলছ" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect এণ্ড্ৰিউ ৱাইলছ. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 16#এণ্ড্ৰিউ ৱাইলছ until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Largoplazo (talk) 11:28, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew wiles[edit]

How old is he? (talk) 17:48, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can see it in the article. :) --D.M. from Ukraine (talk) 21:27, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Photo change[edit]

Are there no better photos available? Poor guy literally looks like a stage villain. Hjnt (talk) 23:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's a better one here (from 2016 I believe) but I can't upload it because I'm not confirmed yet. Chillenb (talk) 21:37, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll upload it when I reach 10 edits. Apparently replying on talk pages counts as editing :) Chillenb (talk) 21:39, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like the picture is copyright protected. So not the best plan. The Banner talk 22:50, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC for Career and research section[edit]

Questions: 1. Should the infobox photo be changed? 2. Should more photos be added to the article in general? 3. Should the “legacy” section be expanded, or left as is? 4. Should it be prefaced by another section, to provide more information about the subject’s post-1995 research? 5. Can the early life section be improved in general, and if so, how? Jarrod Baniqued (he/him) (talk) 07:24, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As far I can see, we have three alternatives available that are not yet in the article: File:Andrew Wiles Degree 2010.jpg, File:Andrew Wiles, Boston 1995.JPG and File:Wiles auf Turm.JPG. Of these, the first one is a very rough crop, that I would not be in favour of including unless to illustrate his Cambridge honorary degree, which is currently not even mentioned in the article.
I am neutral to whether the other two are any better than the current infobox image. The only additional benefit of including one of them in addition that I see is that they show the subject in 1995, which is when he published the corrected proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. Felix QW (talk) 08:59, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why is this straight away a RfC and not a normal discussion? The Banner talk 09:25, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. This is a badly formed and probably unecessary RfC. Nom could have just changed the image if they thought there was a better one. Personally, I don't see an image that's obviously better. NickCT (talk) 14:51, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, fair enough. I just wanted more eyes on the article, and also some input from higher editors on how to start in those five areas. Forgive me, it’s my first time using RfC and I didn’t know if there would be any interest from others using applicable alternatives (other than peer review which I tried). Jarrod Baniqued (he/him) (talk) 18:33, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jarrod Baniqued: - You are forgiven. And welcome! We don't bite the newbies. NickCT (talk) 18:56, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your cordiality. :) Jarrod Baniqued (he/him) (talk) 19:26, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I had this question too. There's a lot of questions here and its probably better to have one section for each question so we can get a better consensus. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 14:52, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I concur. Jarrod Baniqued (he/him) (talk) 18:34, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am especially interested in comments trying to answer questions 3, 4, and 5, for what it's worth. Jarrod Baniqued (he/him) (talk) 19:30, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I support the infobox image being changed if there is a better alternative available. — Sadko (words are wind) 01:32, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Close as a malformed RFC. Just open up a discussion on each of one of these items. Thanks! Nemov (talk) 21:10, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RfC template removed per above discussion. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 21:12, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As for the substance of the matter, I think usual practice with living persons is to have a recent photo in the infobox. File:Andrew Wiles Degree 2010.jpg is the most recent one proposed, but I think for quality reasons I'd rather keep the current one, which is from 2005. I don't think there's any pressing need for another photo of Wiles in the article, but there'd be space for one more. Do we have any cute illustrations related to his work, or maybe him with other noted science people? -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 21:20, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]