Talk:Faltings's theorem

Untitled section

Wouldn't it make more sense to move this to Falting's theorem and redirect to there? user: Gene Ward Smith

Yes - I'll do the move. (BTW, as I mentioned on your user talk, Move Page does that, and creates the redirect.) Charles Matthews 10:56, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Jafeluv (talk) 06:46, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Faltings' theorem → Faltings's theorem — This page should be moved to "Faltings's theorem." That is how possessives are formed. For example, see this book of Bombieri and Gubler for the correct usage. Using Faltings' implies that the theorem was proved by multiple people with the last name Falting, which is, of course, not the case. I would do the move myself, but I think my account is too new. Bwebste (talk) 07:29, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect, in this instance. The individual's name was "Faltings", therefore the possessive form would - in fact - be Faltings'. Strikerforce (talk) 07:35, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Strikerforce, no need to move, as the possessive is correctly formed.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:57, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Sarek. The singular possessive can also be formed with a terminal s, as with other stems, but which one is "correct" is determined by usage (probably either; compare Faltings' own book), not by grammar books. English, a living language, is irregular. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per the three comments above. Jenks24 (talk) 08:34, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Sample application of Faltings' theorem in the 'Consequences' section

In the 'Consequences' section, the following is written.

A sample application of Faltings' theorem is to a weak form of Fermat's Last Theorem: for any fixed $n>4$ there are at most finitely many primitive integer solutions to $a^{n}+b^{n}=c^{n}$ , since for such $n$ the curve $x^{n}+y^{n}=1$ has genus greater than $1$ .

Here $n>4$ should be replaced by $n\geq 4$ : in the case $n=4$ the genus is $3$ , which is still greater than $1$ . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.190.253.144 (talk) 14:16, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Anton Lapounov (talk) 12:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Faltings's theorem. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111002072805/http://retro.seals.ch/digbib/view?rid=ensmat-001%3A1990%3A36%3A%3A560&id=&id2=&id3= to http://retro.seals.ch/digbib/view?rid=ensmat-001%3A1990%3A36%3A%3A560&id=&id2=&id3=

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]