Talk:Fermat's Last Theorem
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fermat's Last Theorem article. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
 | A fact from Fermat's Last Theorem appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 4 May 2012. |  |
 | This article contains a translation of Fermat's last theorem from en.wikipedia. |
This is not Simple English
changeThis page is taken from the version on the (not simple) English Wikipedia. Only small changes have been made.
You can compare them; Here is the ordinary English version and here is the "simple" version.
I think it has not been changed enough for "Simple". I think it would be better to write a new article from the start, instead of using this long version.
Fourohfour 20:54, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Definitely. I'll try and work on this in the future, but in general, articles shouldn't be copied from en. Flcelloguy 21:13, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- The article is much better now. --Cromwellt|talk 00:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree that this article is not 'simple'. It would be better to focus on non-jargon language with reference to using numbers we all understand. For instance 6 cubed (216) plus 8 cubed (512)=728 when what is needed is 729 to form a full third cube - the essence of the problem! Why not centre the article on something like this? Using jargon like diophantine equations, pythagorean triples, and lots of latin only puts off people looking for simplicity - those that want more can go to the other Wiki pages...--87.112.89.243 (talk) 21:53, October 29, 2009
Even better why not use graphical representations similar to those used in Simon Singh's book 'Fermat's Last Theorem' - here you have the instant ability to 'see' the problem three dimensionally - a great way to complement the text. --92.22.117.84 (talk) 22:05, August 8, 2011
Mischaracterization of work in secret
changeWhere the article says that Wiles "wanted to be the first," that isn't quite true. It's more that Wiles wanted to be absolutely sure he had a correct solution before going public with it, because of the fact that proving Fermat's theorem was generally considered crackpot territory and Wiles didn't want his reputation to be tarnished if he turned out to be wrong. I no good at simple English but perhaps someone else could figure out a reasonably concise way of stating that. 75.101.96.4 (talk) 20:54, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
x, y, z, verses a, b, c
changeNotable that the non-simple English Wikipedia transitioned its symbolic clature for the FLT page toward a, b, c being raised to an x; from x, y, z's to n. A significant cleanup was done in October 2021 regarding these's equivalency A51.archaeologist (talk) 01:59, 31 March 2022 (UTC)