Talk:Fields Medal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Awards and prizes (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Awards and prizes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of awards and prizes on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Mathematics (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject Mathematics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Mathematics rating:
B Class
Top Importance
 Field: General
One of the 500 most frequently viewed mathematics articles.

12 != 11[edit]

there are 12 americans not 11.who corrected that ?it is silly Furthermore, France has won 13 medals not 11 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:15, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

2006 rumour[edit]

There is a rumour about Terence Tao for 2006, but we can't get ahead of the official announcement from the International Mathematical Union. Charles Matthews 08:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Has the rumour been published by anyone? Dmn Դմն 10:12, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

What counts? [1]? I expect the invitations to the ICM go out, and then you get some rumours from those in the know. In any case it is not particularly encyclopedic to put this in the page, yet. Charles Matthews 13:48, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

There is a rumour about russian Pereleman for 2006 too. This was published by the italian Il Giornale 3 days ago. 10:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll leave you all to argue about whether Terry Tao is US or AU...Cancerward 10:10, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Also need to note somewhere that Perelman declined it. Cancerward 10:11, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Still only a rumor though. You should probably wait for a official statement, or until the conference actually took place, until stating that as a fact... --17:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Wiles and the medal[edit]

So the current fix of having Wiles listed under "laureates" as having received a silver plaque, is quite unsatisfactory. He's not a laureate and shouldn't be listed there as that just would confuse people not familiar with the whole story of the plaque. I think it may just be best to mention Wiles and the whole age limit thing. Plenty of sources have discussed this, so we would not fall prey to the NOR policy. It would make for a useful and interesting addition to the article --C S (Talk) 08:43, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I made a new section entitled "unusual circumstances" which includes this stuff and other unusual events. I added a couple of good sources and tried to phrase things in a careful manner, but it could probably use a bit more sourcing and perhaps more content (if anybody can find an interesting quote by a famous mathematician, say). --C S (Talk) 21:29, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
"unusual circumstances" is an unsatisfactory heading, but the best I could think of...--C S (Talk) 21:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
"He's not a laureate and shouldn't be listed there" There is no "Nobel" for pedantics, in case you were wondering. Maybe WP will institute one eventually. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:48, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Age limit[edit]

Why is there one?

To give winners time to enjoy. --Alextalk 03:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
The genesis of the rule that it be awarded only to mathematicians no older than forty is evidently the statement that “… while it was in recognition of work already done, it was at the same time intended to be an encouragement for further achievement on the part of the recipients and a stimulus to renewed effort on the part of others”. The above is a quote from the website of the Fields Institute for Research in Mathematical Sciences treesmill 17:26, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Because Fields was shortsighted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

John G. Thompson[edit]

Why is he marked as GB? kuszi 12:24, 15 August 2006 (UTC).

Field of research of each recipient[edit]

One improvement that could be made would be to add a phrase next to each recipient indicating his/her general field of research.

that would work better for some than others. At any rate, I think this is potentially misleading and should be avoided. --C S (Talk) 13:45, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Why it there no Wikipedia category...[edit]

..for people who have been awarded the Fields medal? Apokrif 16:09, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Category:Fields Medalists...?  Regards, David Kernow 01:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Colbert mention[edit]

Is the mention of the Colbert Report really applicable/necessary? Wclark3 01:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't seem necessary to me although that is a funny stunt. If no one else objects I'll remove it. JoshuaZ 01:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree, and I removed it. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 02:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Is it not as relevant as the mention of Eureka and others?

I'm not dead set on having it, but it does seem to fit the bill of example in popular culture. Of course, that may just be an example of systemic bias. I think it does no harm (at least not any more than the other examples), and these examples, I think, occur rarely enough that "cruft" should not be an issue. Presumably that is why there is such a section to begin with... --C S (Talk) 13:44, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

The section has been removed and I agree with the removal. I don't think it added anything crucial. Cruft may not be an issue but the section sticks out like a sore thumb. --Horoball 10:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


{{Image requested}} Polish Wikipedia has pictured of the medals. -- 05:25, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Unfortunately the licensing of the pictures in the Polish article appears to be questioned at present... Thanks, though, for the pointer, David Kernow 13:17, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Found one at [2]. Its from a national lab that allows noncommercial use, but I don't think it's public domain.Enjoyhats 05:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
The IMU has put up some public domain images, which are now in the article. Interesting note: the pictures are supposed to be of the actual medal that was to have gone to Perelman. --C S (Talk) 20:41, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Comparison to the Nobel prize[edit]

The article implies that the Fields Medal is more special as it's only awarded every 4 years. However, since up to 4 mathematicians can be recognised at once, the point is a little moot isn't it? Stevage 08:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Typically the Nobel prize is awarded from 2 to 4 people yearly for each field. Med 10:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Actually no more than 3 nobel prizes are handed out per year and field. Otherwise your point is correct though.
I think that Abel Prize is more similar to Nobel prize. It's awarded annually, there is no age restriction, and laureat receives cca 755 000 €. Maybe it should be mentioned in the article. --Ondrejsv 19:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Mathematics' greatest prize?[edit]

At the beginning of the article it says that the Fields Medal is widely viewed as the greatest prize in mathematics. Although I give credit to the writers for documenting this -- including a recent article in the Notices of the AMS -- I think that most people are simply repeating the "mathematics' greatest prize" tagline by force of habit. I am a mathematician, and if you ask me what prize I would most like to receive, it would certainly be the Abel Prize. Part of this is that the cash award of the AP is about 100 times that of the FM, but the fact that AP is not age restricted (so is more fair) and that at a moment when the worldwide mathematical community is at a larger size than ever before, fewer AP's have been awarded makes the AP seem more competitive are both additional considerations. I ask that the text be changed to something like "which has traditionally been held to be" with an explicit comparison to the Abel Prize. Plclark 06:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC)Plclark

You may prefer an Abel Prize over the Fields Medal for whatever reasons, but that's not sufficient to change the statement as you wish. --Horoball 10:10, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Listing ceremony locations[edit]

At times the location of the ceremony was a move issue (like boycotts by Alexander Grothendieck and soviet government restrictions, etc). Maybe we should list the city/country where each ceremony was held next to the year. If noone disapproves (or does it before me) then I will try to add them after my exams --DFRussia 00:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Futurama film[edit]

Several IP editors have inserted the fact that some Futurama film mentions the Fields Medal. I don't think that adds to the article. I know that the film Good Will Hunting is already mentioned, but that is a famous film that has won several important awards, so I guess an argument could be made there. I removed the Futurama stuff a couple of times, but after it was added again I thought that it may be better to hear what others think about this. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 09:39, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm with you, it seems very trivial. I haven't seen the film, but it sounds like it was a passing one-liner and so not important within the film, either. CRETOG8(t/c) 01:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Why even have a section devoted to the medal in popular culture if you all are not going to include any pop culture references? Just take the whole thing out. (talk) 23:36, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps that's indeed a better approach. I removed the section. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 17:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

List of mathematicians that did not receive a Fields because of the age limit[edit]

I removed this list because it's growing too large. It looks like everybody is adding his/her favourite mathematician. While I'm not against the list per se, I do think it's important to base it on references except of opinions of the people who happen to edit here. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 16:05, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Guy in the medal[edit]

Who is the guy in the medal? Pythagoras?  franklin  21:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

*Oh, is Archimedes!  franklin  21:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Double counting in the 'Ranks by countries'[edit]

Ngô Bảo Châu, with links to both France and Vietnam, is counted twice in the 'Rank by countries' table. Arguably, in this table the numbers for France and Vietnam should be 10.5 and 0.5 respectively, not 11 and 1. I tried changing them but somebody at undid the revision immediately. The current summation system 'double counts'; as such, it's misrepresentative. Mebden (talk) 10:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Why do we even have this section? — Myasuda (talk) 04:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Do other editors support the existence of the section 'Ranks by countries'? My feeling is that it's unnecessary, and that the article is better off without it. It was created less than a week ago [3] (by (talk · contribs)), so it's probably a good time to discuss its presence. — Myasuda (talk) 01:44, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I agree that ranking by countries has no place on this page. I think it should be removed. (talk) 18:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
So we need to delete all the pages of Nobel prize by countries too? I revert! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:37, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
I think it's a good time to reopen this discussion. The list makes less and less sense. A lot of modern mathematicians have multiple nationalities, worked and studied in country they are not citizen of and their actual achievement have very little to do with where they were born. Then, lumping the Soviet Union and Russia together is very questionable and we have the issue of Grothendieck who is likely French by now. From my point of view, the ranking by countries add nothing to the article. Nationalism has no place in the mathematical world. I read the newspapers this morning and all the articles mentioned the medal as some kind of national victory without a line about the actual work. As an encyclopaedia, Wikipedia should strive to do better and yes, we should probably do the same thing with Nobel prize recipients. (talk) 09:11, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Erroneous nationalities[edit]

On a similar subject as the previous comment, I think the national flags for each recipient should be checked more carefully. For example, by what standard is Yau (1982) under USA but Tao (2006) under Australia? At the time of both awards, they were at US universities but neither is a US national. Likewise, Ngo's entry should have to choose; either place of birth, or place of residence at the time of award. (Ryan Reich) (talk) 17:14, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Further comment: This seems to be a real problem. For personal reasons, people will want to see where a mathematician was born, where educated, and where employed (especially when they were awarded the medal). None of them is really meaningful on its own, and some are misleading in particular cases: Grothendieck (1966) being a good example, since he is stateless, and Perelman (2006) another one, since he was not actually employed or even practicing when the medal was given. The goal of saying what a mathematician "is" is probably misguided since (especially for those at the highest levels) they could come from anywhere, move around a lot, and often end up at one of the few national centers of mathematics regardless of their origins. For this reason and also because the Fields Medal is pretty rare, its distribution is not a good indication of national prominence in mathematics, so I think it is best to limit these flag icons to place of birth only, which contains more information about the individual awardee than under what circumstances they found themselves in one of the countries which, at the time, happened to be available. For more detailed information the individual pages are (by design) more appropriate. (Ryan Reich) (talk) 17:55, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Further comment: Whatever system is chosen, there is also the issue of denoting countries which no longer exist or did not exist at the time concerning the awardee. For place of birth, I see:

  • the Soviet Union (Novikov (1970), Margulis (1978), Drinfeld (1990)), plus all other Russian mathematicians thus far.
  • East or West Germany (Faltings (1986), Werner (2006)),
  • Prussia (Roth (1958)),
  • North and South Vietnam (Ngo (2010)),
  • Finland (Ahlfors (1936)).

I may have missed some. There are unpleasant political issues lurking here; I suggest that *strict* adherence to the rule is probably not desirable (e.g. Borcherds was born in South Africa but left at the age of six months!) (Ryan Reich) (talk) 18:21, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Witten is not the only physicist who won the award (at least the phrase is obscure)[edit]

I mean the phrase "In 1990, Edward Witten became the first and so far only physicist to win this award".

Cédric Villani got the award in 2010 for the contribution to the Boltzmann equation and Landau damping. His first work is on condensed matter.

Also it's worth to mention there were other contributions to physical models/theories.

File:FieldsMedalFrontAndBack.jpg to appear as POTD soon[edit]

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:FieldsMedalFrontAndBack.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on July 23, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-07-23. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng {chat} 23:16, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the day
Fields Medal

The obverse (left) and reverse sides of a Fields Medal, the colloquial name for a prize awarded to two, three, or four mathematicians not over 40 years of age at each International Congress of Mathematicians. The name is in honour of Canadian mathematician John Charles Fields, who was instrumental in establishing the award. It is often viewed as the greatest honour a mathematician can receive.

Photo: Stefan Zachow, International Mathematical Union
ArchiveMore featured pictures...

Why is the Fields awarded every 4 years?[edit]

This wasn't explained in the article. Can someone please explain if there are sources that motivate why the Fields Medal is awarded every 4 years? Is it because of tradition, or lack of funding? Why couldn't it be awarded every 2 years, for example? (talk) 07:36, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Women and Fields[edit]

Not even going to bother attempting to add this before discussion, but is it worth mentioning variance regarding the lack of a female winner? Link 1, Link 2.

Doubt that would be allowed as RS, but what about this?

J. Archer, B. Lloyd, Sex and Gender (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002). Turn to p. 187.

The variability hypothesis still evokes controversy, but recent data and analyses may bring some closure to the debate […] Data from a number of representative mental test surveys, involving samples drawn from the national population, have become available in the past twenty years in the USA. These have finally provided consistent results. Both Feingold (1992b) and Hedges and Nowell (1995) have reported that, despite average sex differences being small and relatively stable over time, test score variances of males were generally larger than those of females. Feingold found that males were more variable than females on tests of quantitative reasoning, spatial visualisation, spelling, and general knowledge. […] Hedges and Nowell go one step further and demonstrate that, with the exception of performance on tests of reading comprehension, perceptual speed, and associative memory, more males than females were observed among high-scoring individuals.

LudicrousTripe (talk) 22:22, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

  • I've added a note about the 2014 winner Maryam Mirzakhani (talk) 21:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


The inscription, said to be in Latin, uses a word that is mostly Greek.

Fields Medal 2014 Technical Glitches[edit]

When the wiki is updated we should maybe mention the two website glitches that revealed the names, the first on the 11th on the ICM2014 webpage which seems to have gone relatively unnoticed and the second on the IMU webpage. Below is a reference mentioning the second glitch but not the first:

AnonymousMath (talk) 20:15, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Alexander Grothendieck[edit]

Wikipedia says Alexander Grothendieck Nationality French Residence French Pyrenees How to Register an institution without ID, must have had ID, so I do not know what it's missing identity

He receives a salary From .... He pays taxes to .... He drives a car with insurance From .... Should go to the doctor From .... He needs an identity card From .... From .... He received an award for university establishment under the rule of France Where he studied first degree, a master's degree earned a doctorate, based on what was recorded in an academic institution And received recognition , money received under a place This is ridiculous because its about Wikipedia is a French citizen and stateless award Fidls

Grosse escroquerie américaine[edit]

Il n'y a pas une recension mondiale des médaillés par pays qui donne 18 médaillés aux USA !!!

Par exemple : soit on retient le pays de résidence habituelle et Alexandre Grothendieck est un Français , soit on retient la nationalité et Mirzakhani n'est pas une Etats-Unienne mais une Iranienne qui est sa SEULE nationalité !

WK english se ridiculise aux yeux du Monde par cette escroquerie  !

Il suffit de se reporter aux notices biographiques Wikipedia de 5 mathématiciens cités mensongèrement comme de nationalité US pour voir qu'ils sont de nationalité russe, iranienne etc

La vérité est France = 13 et USA = 13 ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:52, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

(traduction automatique) Nous sommes d'accord. Nous ne voulons pas "escroquerie". Je pense que nous ne serons pas compter les points. Aucun chef d'accusation de score = pas de "escroquerie".

I used machine translation to read the above post. In short, this person felt the page was a huge American scam and the counts by country were very wrong. My answer, machine translated into French and back to English, returns as (machine translation) We agree. We do not want "scam." I think we will not be keeping score. No count score = no "scam". The round-trip translation looks adequate. I kept the sentences deliberately simplistic to minimize the chance that the machine translation could butcher it. Alsee (talk) 22:48, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Lock the medalists and number of medalists by country[edit]

I propose to lock the sections of the medalists and number of medals per country and institution to only a few SERIOUS users.

This seems to get a lot of messing up and changes several times a week. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:10, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Especially user Rezameyqani, whose efforts are greatly appreaciated, but he keeps making unjustified changes to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:09, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Can you explain to me how a person registered academic institution, in which language he writes and undergraduate studies and a master's degree and then doctorate in what and where, on the moon? How he received a scholarship? , is represented by the nation as well as Temporary resident Temporary resident so he was, he refused to serve in order to receive a certificate of permanent citizen, he moved to 4-5 different locations in France and was accepted as a citizen to speak French with a certificate, He received the award French citizen, could not move forward another ten steps ahead 'll Notice it's different French wiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:37, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Changes are needed in Fields medal page.[edit]

I think we should add two new columns to the existing table.One column should indicate current or later (if the laureate died) residency/citizenship of Fields Medal laureate and the other one to mention his/her current (if the laureate is still alive and working in a different institute) or later (if the laureate died,withdrew,etc) affiliated institute.If you agree with me about this suggestion, please reply. Rezameyqani (talk) 08:55, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Cela n'a pas beaucoup de sens !

Les Mathématiciens travaillent dans des tas de laboratoires de pays différents !

Si on veut parler de nationalité , seuls "les papiers" font foi. Est un Etats-unien celui qui a des papiers US ... Est un Français celui qui a des papiers français !

If we consider what you are saying,then we, for example, should consider Maryam Mirzakhani,Effim Zelmanov,Vladimir Drinfeld and many others American because they are living in US for many years or holding US citizenship!Am I right? Rezameyqani (talk) 10:23, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Maxim Kontsevich est naturalisé français ![edit]

L'état final est donc bien France =13 et USA = 13 ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:23, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Kontsevich received his citizenship after been awarded the Fields medal. So we should maybe include his French citizenship with a footnote. There also probably should be a footnote for Grothendieck's citizenship. I am yet to see any evidence that Manjul Bhargava has US citizenship. It seems like his residence in the US has been interpreted as citizenship and there has been a bit of wikiality going on in the media AnonymousMath (talk) 09:40, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 August 2014[edit]

The Fields Medal Page contains biased information about laureates.We need to change this page as we have done about Nobel Prize laureates Page.I do not understand why Wikipedia chief editors insisting on not to change this biased information which now exists on Fields Medal page.The main suggestion is to remove Nationality and add Birthplace and current institution and residency. Rezameyqani (talk) 23:40, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I've reinstated full protection. Work out the issue here with other editors.You have been edit-warring yourself and will be blocked if you do it again. Acroterion (talk) 23:50, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Table format[edit]

The current table format allows the information in each "row" to get out of alignment (especially the institution information versus the rest) when long lines get wrapped. Recommend we change to strict table rows:

Year ICM location Medalists Institution (At the time of receiving the medal) Birthplace Current/Last residency Current/Last Institution
1936 Norway Oslo Lars Ahlfors University of Helsinki Finland United States Harvard University
Jesse Douglas Massachusetts Institute of Technology United States United States City College of New York
1950 United States Cambridge Laurent Schwartz University of Nancy France France Université de Paris VII
Atle Selberg Institute for Advanced Study Norway United States Institute for Advanced Study

This makes the information much easier to read in the article and to edit in the source editor (and maybe in the visual editor, as well—I don't know). Also, the current table is not actually sortable even though the wikicode contains a "sortable" class. This attribute, and the related "unsortable" class attributes on the individual columns, should be removed. - dcljr (talk) 00:46, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

When you mention the current institution there is no need to add another column for "residency."Drako (talk) 05:19, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I agree. One possible solution is the remove the column and add a flag next to the institution. Actual residency seems much more difficult to verify than birthplace and affiliate institutions. AnonymousMath (talk) 09:58, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I agree with AnonymousMath who said:"One possible solution is the remove the column and add a flag next to the institution.". for having a more reliable table about fields medalists,We can put some information about current residency or citizenship status. We should keep this in mind that though almost anyone knows where Harvard university is,It is unclear whether when someone reads this article and sees current institution as for example Lund university,would know where Lund university is. So I guess the suggestion by AnonymousMath is the best solution. (talk) 16:46, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I think the Table format which has been suggested by dcljr is fair. We should probably use this Table format. (talk) 16:50, 15 August 2014 (UTC)


Hello Everyone,I prepared a table for Fields Medal page which,in my opinion,would help us to reach a consensus about edits which have to be done to the page.Of course,I did my best to make it as complete as I could.I think it can be replaced with existing table in the article.(I must greatly thank dcljr for proposing a new and excellent table format): RfC started 14:12, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Year ICM Location Medalists[1] Affiliation (When Awarded) Birthplace Current/Last Affiliation Citation
1936 Oslo, Norway Lars Ahlfors University of Helsinki, Finland Finland Harvard University, US[2][3] "Awarded medal for research on covering surfaces related to Riemann surfaces of inverse functions of entire and meromorphic functions. Opened up a new fileds of analysis."
Jesse Douglas Massachusetts Institute of Technology, US United States City College of New York, US[4][5] "Did important work of the Plateau problem which is concerned with finding minimal surfaces connecting and determined by some fixed boundary."
1950 Cambridge, US Laurent Schwartz University of Nancy, France France University of Paris VII, France[6][7] "Developed the theory of distributions, a new notion of generalized function motivated by the Dirac delta-function of theoretical physics."
Atle Selberg Institute for Advanced Study, US Norway Institute for Advanced Study, US[8] "Developed generalizations of the sieve methods of Viggo Brun; achieved major results on zeros of the Riemann zeta function; gave an elementary proof of the prime number theorem (with P. Erdös), with a generalization to prime numbers in an arbitrary arithmetic progression."
1954 Amsterdam, Netherland Kunihiko Kodaira Institute for Advanced Study, US

Princeton University, US

Japan University of Tokyo, Japan[9] "Achieved major results in the theory of harmonic integrals and numerous applications to Kählerian and more specifically to algebraic varieties. He demonstrated, by sheaf cohomology, that such varieties are Hodge manifolds."
Jean-Pierre Serre University of Nancy, France France Collège de France, France[10][11] "Achieved major results on the homotopy groups of spheres, especially in his use of the method of spectral sequences. Reformulated and exented some of the main results of complex variable theory in terms of sheaves."
1958 Edinburgh, UK Klaus Roth University College London, UK Weimar Republic Imperial College London, UK[12] "Solved in 1955 the famous Thue-Siegel problem concerning the approximation to algebraic numbers by rational numbers and proved in 1952 that a sequence with no three numbers in arithmetic progression has zero density (a conjecture of Erdös and Turán of 1935)."
René Thom University of Strasbourg, France France Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France[13] "In 1954 invented and developed the theory of cobordism in algebraic topology. This classification of manifolds used homotopy theory in a fundamental way and became a prime example of a general cohomology theory."
1962 Stockholm, Sweden Lars Hörmander University of Stockholm, Sweden Sweden Lund University, Sweden[14] "Worked in partial diffential equations. Specifically, contributed to the general theory of linear differential operators. The questions go back to one of Hilbert's problems at the 1900 congress."
John Milnor Princeton University, US United States Stony Brook University, US[15] "Proved that a 7-dimensional sphere can have several differential structures; this led to the creation of the field of differential topology."
1966 Moscow, USSR Michael Atiyah University of Oxford, UK United Kingdom University of Edinburgh, UK[16] "Did joint work with Hirzebruch in K-theory; proved jointly with Singer the index theorem of elliptic operators on complex manifolds; worked in collaboration with Bott to prove a fixed point theorem related to the "Lefschetz formula"."
Paul Joseph Cohen Stanford University, US United States Stanford University, US[17] "Used technique called "forcing" to prove the independence in set theory of the axiom of choice and of the generalized continuum hypothesis. The latter problem was the first of Hilbert's problems of the 1900 Congress."
Alexander Grothendieck Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France Weimar Republic Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique , France[18] "Built on work of Weil and Zariski and effected fundamental advances in algebraic geometry. He introduced the idea of K-theory (the Grothendieck groups and rings). Revolutionized homological algebra in his celebrated "Tohoku paper""
Stephen Smale University of California, Berkeley, US United States City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong[19] "Worked in differential topology where he proved the generalized Poincaré conjecture in dimension n>=5: Every closed, n-dimensional manifold homotopy-equivalent to the n-dimensional sphere is homeomorphic to it. Introduced the method of handle-bodies to solve this and related problems."
1970 Nice, France Alan Baker University of Cambridge, UK United Kingdom Trinity College, Cambridge, UK[20] "Generalized the Gelfond-Schneider theorem (the solution to Hilbert's seventh problem). From this work he generated transcendental numbers not previously identified."
Heisuke Hironaka Harvard University, US Japan Kyoto University, Japan[21][22] "Generalized work of Zariski who had proved for dimension"
John G. Thompson University of Cambridge, UK United States University of Cambridge, UK [23] "Proved jointly with W. Feit that all non-cyclic finite simple groups have even order. The extension of this work by Thompson determined the minimal simple finite groups, that is, the simple finite groups whose proper subgroups are solvable."
Sergei Novikov Moscow State University, USSR USSR Steklov Mathematical Institute, Russia

Moscow State University, Russia

University of Maryland-College Park, US[24][25]

"Made important advances in topology, the most well-known being his proof of the topological invariance of the Pontrjagin classes of the differentiable manifold. His work included a study of the cohomology and homotopy of Thom spaces."
1974 Vancouver, Canada Enrico Bombieri University of Pisa, Italy Italy Institute for Advanced Study, US[26] "Major contributions in the primes, in univalent functions and the local Bieberbach conjecture, in theory of functions of several complex variables, and in theory of partial differential equations and minimal surfaces - in particular, to the solution of Bernstein's problem in higher dimensions."
David Mumford Harvard University, US United States Brown University, US[27] "Contributed to problems of the existence and structure of varieties of moduli, varieties whose points parametrize isomorphism classes of some type of geometric object. Also made several important contributions to the theory of algebraic surfaces."
1978 Helsinki, Finland Pierre Deligne Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France Belgium Institute for Advanced Study, US[28] "Gave solution of the three Weil conjectures concerning generalizations of the Riemann hypothesis to finite fields. His work did much to unify algebraic geometry and algebraic number theory."
Charles Fefferman Princeton University, US United States Princeton University, US[29] "Contributed several innovations that revised the study of multidimensional complex analysis by finding correct generalizations of classical (low-dimensional) results."
Daniel Quillen Massachusetts Institute of Technology, US United States University of Oxford, UK[30] "The prime architect of the higher algebraic K-theory, a new tool that successfully employed geometric and topological methods and ideas to formulate and solve major problems in algebra, particularly ring theory and module theory."
Grigori Margulis Princeton University, US USSR Yale University, US[31] "Provided innovative analysis of the structure of Lie groups. His work belongs to combinatorics, differential geometry, ergodic theory, dynamical systems, and Lie groups."
1982 Warsaw, Poland Alain Connes Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France France Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France

Collège de France, France

Ohio State University, US[32]

"Contributed to the theory of operator algebras, particularly the general classification and structure theorem of factors of type III, classification of automorphisms of the hyperfinite factor, classification of injective factors, and applications of the theory of C*-algebras to foliations and differential geometry in general."
William Thurston Princeton University, US United States Cornell University, US[33] "Revolutionized study of topology in 2 and 3 dimensions, showing interplay between analysis, topology, and geometry. Contributed idea that a very large class of closed 3-manifolds carry a hyperbolic structure."
Shing-Tung Yau Institute for Advanced Study, US China Harvard University, US[34] "Made contributions in differential equations, also to the Calabi conjecture in algebraic geometry, to the positive mass conjecture of general relativity theory, and to real and complex Monge-Ampère equations."
1986 Berkeley, US Simon Donaldson University of Oxford, UK United Kingdom Imperial College London, UK[35] "Received medal primarily for his work on topology of four-manifolds, especially for showing that there is a differential structure on euclidian four-space which is different from the usual structure."
Gerd Faltings Princeton University, US West Germany Max Planck Institute for Mathematics, Germany[36] "Using methods of arithmetic algebraic geometry, he received medal primarily for his proof of the Mordell Conjecture."
Michael Freedman University of California, San Diego, US United States United StatesMicrosoft Station Q[37] "Developed new methods for topological analysis of four-manifolds. One of his results is a proof of the four-dimensional Poincaré Conjecture."
1990 Kyoto, Japan Vladimir Drinfeld University of Kharkiv, USSR USSR University of Chicago, US[38] "For his work on quantum groups and for his work in number theory."
Vaughan F. R. Jones University of California, Berkeley, US New Zealand University of California, Berkeley, US[39],

Vanderbilt University, US[40]

"for his discovery of an unexpected link between the mathematical study of knots – a field that dates back to the 19th century – and statistical mechanics, a form of mathematics used to study complex systems with large numbers of components."
Shigefumi Mori Kyoto University, Japan Japan Kyoto University, Japan[41] "for the proof of Hartshorne’s conjecture and his work on the classification of three-dimensional algebraic varieties."
Edward Witten Institute for Advanced Study, US United States Institute for Advanced Study, US[42] "... his ability to interpret physical ideas in mathematical form is quite unique."[43]
1994 Zurich, Switzerland Jean Bourgain Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France Belgium Institute for Advanced Study, France[44] "Bourgain's work touches on several central topics of mathematical analysis: the geometry of Banach spaces, convexity in high dimensions, harmonic analysis, ergodic theory, and finally, nonlinear partial differential equations from mathematical physics."
Pierre-Louis Lions Paris Dauphine University, France France Collège de France, France

École polytechnique, France[45]

"... such nonlinear partial differential equation simply do not have smooth or even C1 solutions existing after short times. ... The only option is therefore to search for some kind of "weak" solution. This undertaking is in effect to figure out how to allow for certain kinds of "physically correct" singularities and how to forbid others. ... Lions and Crandall at last broke open the problem by focusing attention on viscosity solutions, which are defined in terms of certain inequalities holding wherever the graph of the solution is touched on one side or the other by a smooth test function."
Jean-Christophe Yoccoz Paris-Sud 11 University, France France Collège de France, France[46] "proving stability properties - dynamic stability, such as that sought for the solar system, or structural stability, meaning persistence under parameter changes of the global properties of the system."
Efim Zelmanov University of California, San Diego, US USSR Steklov Mathematical Institute, Russia,

University of California, San Diego, US[47]

"For his solution to the restricted Burnside problem."
1998 Berlin, Germany Richard Borcherds University of California, Berkeley, US

University of Cambridge, UK

South Africa University of California, Berkeley, US[48] "for his work on the introduction of vertex algebras, the proof of the Moonshine conjecture and for his discovery of a new class of automorphic infinite products"
Timothy Gowers University of Cambridge, UK United Kingdom University of Cambridge, UK[49] "William Timothy Gowers has provided important contributions to functional analysis, making extensive use of methods from combination theory. These two fields apparently have little to do with each other, and a significant achievement of Gowers has been to combine these fruitfully."
Maxim Kontsevich Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France

Rutgers University, US

USSR Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France

Rutgers University, US[50]

"contributions to four problems of geometry"
Curtis T. McMullen Harvard University, US United States Harvard University, US[51] "He has made important contributions to various branches of the theory of dynamical systems, such as the algorithmic study of polynomial equations, the study of the distribution of the points of a lattice of a Lie group, hyperbolic geometry, holomorphic dynamics and the renormalization of maps of the interval."
2002 Beijing, China Laurent Lafforgue Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France France Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France[52] "Laurent Lafforgue has been awarded the Fields Medal for his proof of the Langlands correspondence for the full linear groups

GLr (r≥1

) over function fields."

Vladimir Voevodsky Institute for Advanced Study, US USSR Institute for Advanced Study, US[53] " he defined and developed motivic cohomology and the

A1-homotopy theory of algebraic varieties; he proved the Milnor conjectures on the K-theory of fields"

2006 Madrid, Spain Andrei Okounkov Princeton University, US USSR Columbia University, US[54] "for his contributions bridging probability,

representation theory and algebraic geometry"

Grigori Perelman None USSR Steklov Mathematical Institute, Russia[55] "for his contributions to geometry and his revolutionary insights into the analytical and geometric structure of the Ricci flow"
Terence Tao University of California, Los Angeles, US Australia University of California, Los Angeles, US[56] "for his contributions to partial differential equations, combinatorics, harmonic analysis and additive number theory "
Wendelin Werner Paris-Sud 11 University, France West Germany ETH Zurich, Switzerland[57] "for his contributions to the development of stochastic Loewner evolution, the geometry of two-dimensional Brownian motion, and conformal field theory"
2010 Hyderabad, India Elon Lindenstrauss Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel

Princeton University, US

Israel Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel[58] "For his results on measure rigidity in ergodic theory, and their applications to number theory."
Ngô Bảo Châu Paris-Sud 11 University, France

Institute for Advanced Study, US

North Vietnam Paris-Sud 11 University, France

University of Chicago, US

Vietnam Institute for Advanced Study, Vietnam[59]

"For his proof of the Fundamental Lemma in the theory of automorphic forms through the introduction of new algebro-geometric methods"
Stanislav Smirnov University of Geneva, Switzerland USSR University of Geneva, Switzerland[60] "For the proof of conformal invariance of percolation and the planar Ising model in statistical physics"
Cédric Villani École Normale Supérieure de Lyon, France

Institut Henri Poincaré, France

France Lyon University, France

Institut Henri Poincaré, France[61]

"For his proofs of nonlinear Landau damping and convergence to equilibrium for the Boltzmann equation."
2014 Seoul, South Korea Artur Avila Paris Diderot University, France

CNRS, France

Instituto Nacional de Matemática Pura e Aplicada, Brazil

Brazil Paris Diderot University, France

CNRS, France

Instituto Nacional de Matemática Pura e Aplicada, Brazil[62]

"is awarded a Fields Medal for his profound contributions to dynamical systems theory, which have changed the face of the field, using the powerful idea of renormalization as a unifying principle."
Manjul Bhargava Princeton University, US Canada Princeton University, US[63][64] "is awarded a Fields Medal for developing powerful new methods in the geometry of numbers, which he applied to count rings of small rank and to bound the average rank of elliptic curves."
Martin Hairer University of Warwick, UK Austria University of Warwick, UK[65][66][67] "is awarded a Fields Medal for his outstanding contributions to the theory of stochastic partial differential equations, and in particular for the creation of a theory of regularity structures for such equations."
Maryam Mirzakhani Stanford University, US Iran Stanford University, US[68][69] "is awarded the Fields Medal for her outstanding contributions to the dynamics and geometry of Riemann surfaces and their moduli spaces."
2018 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil[70] n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
  1. ^ "List of Fields Medallists". International Mathematical Union (IMU). 8 May 2008. Retrieved 25 March 2009. 
  2. ^
  3. ^ "Lars Ahlfors (1907-1996)". Harvard University, Dept. of Math. 7 November 2004. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  4. ^ "Jesse Douglas". Encyclopedia Britannica. 28 May 2010. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  5. ^
  6. ^ "Laurent Moise Schwartz". School of Mathematics and Statistics University of St Andrews, Scotland. 24 June 2007. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  7. ^ Schwartz, Laurent (1 Feb 2001). Un mathématicien aux prises avec le siècle [A Mathematician Grappling with His Century]. AMS: Birkhäuser. ISBN 978-3-0348-7584-4. Retrieved 21 August 2014. 
  8. ^
  9. ^
  10. ^
  11. ^ "Jean-Pierre Serre". Encyclopedia Britannica. 5 Feb 1997. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  12. ^ Mckinnon Riehm, Elaine; Hoffman, Frances (3 November 2011). Turbulent Times in Mathematics: The Life of J.C. Fields and the History of the Fields Medal. American Math Society: American Mathematical Society. p. 212. ISBN 978-0821869147. Retrieved 16 August 2014. 
  13. ^,%20Rene.pdf
  14. ^
  15. ^ "John W. Milnor". Stony Brook University. 5 March 1997. Retrieved 17 August 2014. 
  16. ^
  17. ^
  18. ^
  19. ^ "Prof. Stephen SMALE (史梅爾)". City University of Hong Kong. 5 April 2012. Retrieved 18 August 2014. 
  20. ^ "The Laureates". Heidelberg Laureate Forum Foundation (HLFF). 25 September 2013. Retrieved 16 August 2014. 
  21. ^
  22. ^ "No title". Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences,Kyoto,Japan. 26 May 2007. Retrieved 16 August 2014. 
  23. ^
  24. ^
  25. ^ "Novikov, Sergei Petrovich". Russian Academy of Science. 1 January 2012. Retrieved 20 August 2014. 
  26. ^ BARTOCCI, CLAUDIO; Betti, Renato; Guerraggio, Angelo et al., eds. (2011 pages=2013-2014). [Mathematical Lives: Protagonists of the Twentieth Century From Hilbert to Wiles] |trans-title= requires |title= (help) (2011 ed.). Springer. ISBN 978-3642136054. Retrieved 18 August 2014.  Check date values in: |date= (help);
  27. ^ "David Mumford=12 May 2006". The Division of Applied Mathematics, Brown University. Retrieved 18 August 2014. 
  28. ^
  29. ^
  30. ^
  31. ^
  32. ^ "Alain Connes". 25 May 2012. Retrieved 18 August 2014. 
  33. ^ "William P. Thurston, 1946-2012". 30 August 2012. Retrieved 18 August 2014. 
  34. ^
  35. ^ "Simon Donaldson (Royal Society Research Professor)". Department of Mathematics, Imperial College, Queen's Gate, London. 16 January 2008. Retrieved 16 August 2014. 
  36. ^ "The Laureates". Heidelberg Laureate Forum Foundation (HLFF). 6 October 2013. Retrieved 16 August 2014. 
  37. ^
  38. ^ "Vladimir Gershonovich Drinfeld". School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of St Andrews, Scotland. 18 August 2009. Retrieved 16 August 2014. 
  39. ^ "Curriculum Vitae: Vaughan F. R. Jones". University of California, Berkeley. 10 November 2001. Retrieved 16 August 2014. 
  40. ^ Salisbury, David (6 April 2011). "Fields Medalist joins Vanderbilt faculty". Vanderbilt University. Retrieved 17 May 2011. 
  41. ^ "The Laureates". Heidelberg Laureate Forum Foundation (HLFF). 10 April 2014. Retrieved 16 August 2014. 
  42. ^
  43. ^
  44. ^
  45. ^ "Collège de France". 16 December 2013. Retrieved 18 August 2014. 
  46. ^ "Collège de France". 16 December 2013. Retrieved 18 August 2014. 
  47. ^
  48. ^ "The Laureates". Heidelberg Laureate Forum Foundation (HLFF). 10 April 2014. Retrieved 16 August 2014. 
  49. ^ "William Timothy Gowers". Encyclopedia Britannica. 28 March 2009. Retrieved 16 August 2014. 
  50. ^ "CURRICULUM VITAE". ihes. 22 November 2009. Retrieved 16 August 2014. 
  51. ^
  52. ^ "Curriculum Vitae". ihes. 6 December 2005. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  53. ^
  54. ^ "Department of Mathematics". University of Columbia, Department of Mathematics. 20 December 2012. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  55. ^ "Encylopedia Britannica". Encylopedia Britannica. 28 May 2008. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  56. ^ "Vitae and Bibliography for Terence Tao". UCLA Dept. of Math. 16 March 2010. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  57. ^ "Wendelin WERNER". ETH Zurich. 18 September 2013. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  58. ^ "Nobel at HU". The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. 5 July 2011. Retrieved 16 August 2014. 
  59. ^
  60. ^
  61. ^
  62. ^
  63. ^
  64. ^
  65. ^
  66. ^
  67. ^
  68. ^
  69. ^ "Department of Mathematics". Stanford University. 22 January 2009. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  70. ^ "Fazendo as contas para o futuro — Ciência Hoje" (in (Portuguese)). 2014-02-25. Retrieved 2014-08-14. 

about above table[edit]

There are other tables in the article in which they contain information about fields medalists.Should the above table replace with them? Rezameyqani (talk) 14:12, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

I will be glad to hear your valuable comments.Rezameyqani (talk) 14:18, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Looks great to me AnonymousMath (talk) 17:30, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Looks good to me Fraulein451 (talk) 16:14, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Yau was not born in Hong Kong. He was born in mainland China shortly before the government of the Republic of China was overthrown, according to his website. --Stomatapoll (talk) 12:01, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

@Stomatapoll Yes,You are right. I've just corrected it. If you have any other ideas about this table,please don't be afraid to inform me.Thank You Rezameyqani (talk) 12:40, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
At the risk of delaying consensus, I'm wondering whether it might make more sense for the birthplace info to use the format "country-at-birth (country-now)" instead of "country-now (country-at-birth)". - dcljr (talk) 00:19, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
As for the actual RFC: If the relevant columns of the table are made sortable, then, yes, the other tables (by country of origin and by working institutions) should be removed, IMO. - dcljr (talk) 00:53, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@dcljr I just changed the format of birthplace coloumn to "country-at-birth (country-now)".Rezameyqani (talk) 07:08, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I originally came back here to lament that a table using "rowspan"s couldn't be sorted, but I guess I was wrong! In my FF 17.0.9, anyway, the rows get sorted properly with the "rowspan" info duplicated in the right places. Cool beans! I had no idea... - dcljr (talk) 10:06, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Rezameyqani, you accidentally left two "former"s in there, which I have changed to "now"s. Also, I've converted the Moscow entry in the "ICM location" column. I see that in Vladimir Drinfeld's entry, "{{flagicon|Ukraine}}(former {{flagicon|Ukrainian SSR}})" was changed to "{{flagicon|USSR}}(now {{flagicon|Ukraine}})". Was that a mistake? - dcljr (talk) 10:28, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
dcljr Yes,I discussed with other editors,and they suggested this:USSR was consisted of several Soviets, and all of theses soviet albeit autonomous,was representing under USSR flag.So I changed those flags(i.e.Russian SFSR,Ukrainian USS,etc). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rezameyqani (talkcontribs) 10:34, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

The Australian Academy of Science should be removed from Terence Tao's listing. He is a member, but this is not the kind of affiliation that belongs in the table. Listing all the academies of science that Fields medallists belong to would be a mess -- indeed Tao is also a member of American Academy of Science and the Royal Swedish Academy of Science. AnonymousMath (talk) 08:38, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

AnonymousMath Yours assessment is right.I changed that.any further comments?Rezameyqani (talk) 09:38, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I think Current/Last Institution should be change to Affiliation because this is the standard word in academic area.Monfie (talk) 10:58, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Monfie To make it more readable and reliable,I just changed that. Thank you for your precise assessment.Rezameyqani (talk) 11:10, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I think it should be "Current/last affiliation". The last column is not the person's affiliation at the time of the medal. Probably the word Institution should also be changed in the "Institution (At the time of the medal)" column. Sławomir Biały (talk) 13:48, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Sławomir Biały I just corrected the table. Also there was an error regarding Columbia University.It's corrected by now.Many Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rezameyqani (talkcontribs) 20 August 2014
Why there is no flag in "Affiliation (At the time of receiving the medal)"? I suggest if we use just "Affiliation", it means Affiliation at the time, and then if it has never changed, no need to mention it again in "Current/Last Affiliation" Monfie (talk) 16:10, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Monfie There is a consensus to not to put flag in "Affiliation (At the time of receiving the medal.Also I believe It will make the table messy and,furthermore,disrupt the way the table looks like now.Yet if you can convince other editors on your suggestions,I'm ready to make changes immediately.Thank You.Rezameyqani (talk) 16:30, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
IMO, it makes more sense to have flags in the "Affiliation (At time of receiving the medal)" column (the name of which should probably be shortened to something like "Affiliation (When Awarded)") than in the "Current/Last Affiliation" column, although I could personally do without either. On another topic, why were the present-day-country indications ("now X") removed from the table? - dcljr (talk) 00:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
To be honest, I would prefer to see the name of the country written out instead of the flags if country information is to be included. There are some flags that I do not readily recognize, and as Rezameyqani says, it does make the table rather messy (see WP:MOSFLAG for general arguments along those lines). It also encourages nationalistic flag waving which this page seem to suffer already too much from. Shortening the column name seems a good suggestion and I also agree to include country info with affiliation at time of award if it is included in current/last affiliation. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 06:42, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Considering that User:JohnBlackburne in the discussion at WT:WPM#Fields Medal Table has come down rather strongly against the idea of including flags, under the explicit recommendations of MOS:FLAG, it seems like the only thing for it is to remove the flags entirely. Sławomir Biały (talk) 12:00, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I am only now seeing the discussion over there for the first time. It would have been better to keep the discussion on this talk page.... - dcljr (talk) 12:30, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:MULTI, there should not be parallel discussions. What happens if their final outcomes are opposite? --Redrose64 (talk) 12:56, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@dcljr,@Jitse Niesen.I just made some changes. "now X" has been removed because all of the medalists explicitly cite their birth place as for example France,US,USSR or West Germany. I believe we should preserve what they have cited about it.Rezameyqani (talk) 09:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough. But I'm not sure the current state of the table is what Jitse Niesen had in mind. (Sorry to make you go round in circles, Rezameyqani — hold off implementing any changes based on this comment until JN, at least, weighs in.) Now that I've seen several options, I guess my "ultimate preference" would be to do something like this:
Year ICM Location Medalists[n 1] Affiliation (When Awarded) Birthplace Current/Last Affiliation
1936 Norway Oslo Lars Ahlfors Finland University of Helsinki Finland United States Harvard University[n 2][n 3]
Jesse Douglas United States Massachusetts Institute of Technology United States United States City College of New York[n 4]
1950 United States Cambridge Laurent Schwartz France University of Nancy France France University of Paris VII[n 5]
Atle Selberg United States Institute for Advanced Study Norway United States Institute for Advanced Study[n 6]
  1. ^ "List of Fields Medallists". International Mathematical Union (IMU). 8 May 2008. Retrieved 25 March 2009. 
  2. ^
  3. ^ "Lars Ahlfors (1907-1996)". Harvard University, Dept. of Math. 7 November 2004. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  4. ^ "Jesse Douglas". Encyclopedia Britannica. 28 May 2010. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  5. ^ "Laurent Moise Schwartz". School of Mathematics and Statistics University of St Andrews, Scotland. 24 June 2007. Retrieved 19 August 2014. 
  6. ^
Notice how it looks cleaner to have the flags in front of the institutions; in addition, they result in more logical sorting of institutions by country, which I believe can serve as justification for their inclusion in this table. The spelling out of the country names in the Birthplace column, OTOH (a big improvement, IMO) make flags there completely unnecessary. - dcljr (talk) 11:54, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@dcljrYou can make changes in the table,since it's based on your proposal.Of course,Your suggested version is much more cleaner.I was looking for a way to make it looks like this.I gonna leave for couple of days,so if you'd take responsibility for making changes(not substantial ones, of course!),I'd be really glad!remember,please do not make any substantial changes to the above table,unless you can reach a consensus.ThanksRezameyqani (talk) 12:04, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Uh, OK... well, I'll leave this little version of the table for a day or two to get people's immediate impressions, then if it seems appropriate I'll convert the entire table above. - dcljr (talk) 12:30, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
My preference would be no flags at all (in common with Sławomir Biały and JohnBlackburne, it seems). That does indeed make the sorting useless, so I would also remove that possibility. I would also de-link the country names. Concretely, this gives the table immediately below (where I removed the references to avoid messing up this talk page, but they should of course be included in the version going live.). -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:39, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Year ICM Location Medalists Affiliation (When Awarded) Birthplace Current/Last Affiliation
1936 Oslo, Norway Lars Ahlfors University of Helsinki, Finland Finland Harvard University, US
Jesse Douglas Massachusetts Institute of Technology, US United States City College of New York, US
1950 Cambridge, US Laurent Schwartz University of Nancy, France France University of Paris VII, France
Atle Selberg Institute for Advanced Study, US Norway Institute for Advanced Study, US

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────. Yes, no flags. I gave full reasons at the maths project but basically MOS:FLAG is clear and the flags are just decorative clutter and don't belong. As an added benefit the question over which flag to use no longer needs to be dealt with.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 12:45, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

  • No flags at all please. I am not sure the "Country of origin" field is particularly useful anyway, as it makes it look as if Grothendieck and Werner are mathematically German, while they are definitely mathematically French (not to mention their citizenship). —Kusma (t·c) 13:29, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Rather than Nobel prize, which has a full article about winner's nationality, in other academic awards flags are used (e.g. Turing Award) and it make more clear and can get lots of information with one look. another issue: I suggest Venue instead of Location.Monfie (talk) 13:56, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I vote for dcljr's suggestion with flags AnonymousMath (talk) 13:59, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

I want to thank you all,for your time and vigorous efforts to make the table as the best possible. As I mentioned above,I cannot come here often in next days,So I: believe any of you who feels that he/she can contribute to this table,I appreciate it.Of course,Since the above table is mainly based on dcljr's proposal,I think probably it'd be better to consult with dcljr,before make any changes to the table.Finally,my opinion about the table is close with what JohnBlackburne has suggested,though I think it'd be better,in current/last affiliation, to put flags before affiliation name(s)(just like the second table which is propposed by dcljr).In case of any deadlock(s),my vote goes for JohnBlackburne.ThanksRezameyqani (talk) 19:18, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

@Kusma If by saying "I am not sure the "Country of origin" field is particularly useful anyway, as it makes it look as if Grothendieck and Werner are mathematically German, while they are definitely mathematically French (not to mention their citizenship)" You mean that we should remove this field,I completely agree with you.In my opinion,It suffices to have the above table which we are discussing about,and list of the medalists by affiliation.Rezameyqani (talk) 03:06, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello there. I just updated the above table,with respect to the concerns which has been addressed by @Brightnsalty, Joseluismb.I also de-linked the countries in the birthplace referring to Jitse Niesen proposal. Yet I modified the flags regarding dcljr's proposal,since the current table is based on his efforts,though my opinion is to remove all of the flags,just like what JohnBlackburne said.I'll be glad to hear your invaluable comments. Cheers.Rezameyqani (talk) 15:07, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
For the record, I'm leaving this for others to hash out. Please don't involve me in the conversation anymore. Thanks. - dcljr (talk) 01:59, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Comment Watch out, folks! This is getting into the thin end of the committee design phase, where everyone spoils everyone else's efforts by tinkering and bickering over details. Quit while you are ahead. I have just come on on the RFC, and already like Dcljr, and probably for the same reason, I'm outtahere immediately. Good luck all! JonRichfield (talk) 07:39, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Cet article est le village Potemkine ![edit]

Tout est fait pour dissimuler que la vérité est France = 13 et USA = 13

Truquez ! Truquez mes petits amis ...

Vous vous ridiculisez aux yeux du Monde !

Il est bien évident que le seul critère à retenir est la nationalité effective du chercheur ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:33, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Le plus extraordinaire dans votre hypocrisie , totalement anglo-saxonne , est le fait d'attribuer "statless" à Grothendieck. Si la nationalité n'a plus aucune importance , ce que je contexte totalement , Grothendieck ne vivant pas sur la Lune , son lieu de résidence est la France

The editors should correct this error.In the table,and under the current/last residency,It is mentioned that Alexander Grothendieck is statelss which it seems to be wrong,According to his Wiki page,he's currently resides in France. (talk) 17:10, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Dear friend,Nationality is not the matter of having a passport of a certain country!please do not use racist-like and slang-like words or phrases.if you think about this issue you will realize that we should separate birthplace and residency. (talk) 17:10, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear friend , quand on voit ce qui se passe à Ferguson , on se passerait aisément des leçons anti-racistes qu'administrent les nouveaux convertis des EU au Monde entier , depuis 50 ans.IRRELEVANT !.Alors , merci ! PAS cet argument  !. Si racisme il y a , il est dans cette contribution où toutes manipulations sont bonnes pour nier FR = 13 et EU = 13. C'est quand même incroyable d'en arriver à nier le fait national , comme dans cet article , pour arriver à dissimuler cette évidence ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:40, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

"This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject." Trêve, mon ami. Charles Matthews (talk) 08:48, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 16 August 2014[edit]

It's necessary to modify many flags amongst the medal winners. Many of them are wrong (i.e. Soviet Union instead of Russia for recent winners). Tropicalia115 (talk) 18:04, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


It is insignificant for a mathematician to mention his/her residence, when you mention their institution it suffices. It is also hard to verify. Birthplace is also needs to be changed to nationality as it is important to know where the person has been raised and educated.--Drako (talk) 23:01, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I do not think this is a good idea,I believe if anyone wants to know about where a medalist raised and educated,he/she can click on the name on the table which will direct him/her to medalists wiki page.Fortunately, each of medalists wiki pages contain great deal of information about where a person raised and educated.Rezameyqani (talk) 06:37, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Birthplace is a much more concrete, verifiable fact than nationality (or even residency). It is true that it only conveys meaningful information by proxy, and that this information can sometimes be misleading. For instance, although Michael Atiyah was born in England, he grew up in Sudan. But things like "nationality" tend to get Balkanized fairly rapidly on Wikipedia, so I think it is best left as birthplace. As Reza says, full biographical details can be found by following the Wiki link to the biography. Sławomir Biały (talk) 14:03, 20 August 2014 (UTC)


Since there is a productive and amicable ongoing conversation concerning updates to the page, I would like to remove the protection I applied as a result of last week's edit war. Unless there are any objections, I'm going to leave it in place for another 12 hours or so, then remove it. Acroterion (talk) 12:38, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

@Acroterion (talk) With respect,I think if you keep the page protected for another 48 hours it would be better.In my opinion,We should build much more stronger consensus here,to prevent what was happened to this page,few days ago. Thank You.Rezameyqani (talk) 13:57, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
If that suits you, that's fine with me. I don't like to keep full protection any longer than it is needed, so let me know if you think it can be unprotected any earlier. I appreciate your effort to work it out here. Acroterion (talk) 14:30, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Acroterion (talk) No Problem.Please keep the page protected for another 24 hours(instead of 48 hours).After that period. Please remove protection.Thank you.Rezameyqani (talk) 14:43, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
It looks like the discussion is coming to a close, with a few issues remaining. I'm going to leave protection on for a little while longer until there's a solid indication of consensus over flags, etc. Acroterion (talk) 13:26, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I've removed protection. Please be careful about reverts or appearances of reverts. Acroterion (talk) 21:37, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@Acroterion (talk) I'm glad that:1)Editors who are interested in this page are finally reaching a comprehensive consensus about table format and its content,though there is a little bit of a debate about flags issue,which I think It will be solve in coming hours.I hope that the consensus here,set a basis for reviewing similar tables on Wikipedia. 2)The protection which is imposed on editing(which in part was result of fault!) finally is removed. Yet,I am a little worried,because though we are really close to reach a comprehensive consensus,we are not there yet, and this may cause unwanted harm to page by other editors whom they did not participate in the above discussion. Is there any Bot which can handle this concern?Also Is there anyway that we can make page a featured page?ThanksRezameyqani (talk) 22:09, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I'll try to keep an eye on the article. There are no bots that can help with anything but simple vandalism, that really needs to be done by humans. By all means, this is a top-importance mathematics article, and I encourage its improvement to GA or FA standard. Acroterion (talk) 23:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

I have blocked Seoul1978 permanently, since they have made no effort to participate on this talkpage before repeatedly reverting and because they have a history of using sockpuppets to evade scrutiny on this subject. Accordingly I have semi-protected the article, which will prevent logged-out users and new users from editing. Please remember that anyone who breaks 3RR in a content dispute is liable to be blocked: call for help from an administrator if you encounter such an edit-warrior, then stop - don't get drawn in. Acroterion (talk) 14:05, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Clark medal[edit]

I reverted an edit which added the following remark after mentioning that the Fields Medal is often compared to the Nobel Prize: "though the "mathematician's Clark Medal" would be a more appropriate analogy to economics, given the age restriction". My main reason is that this smells of original research: is this the editor's opinion or has this argument been made? The only source mentioning both prizes together which I found in a cursory search, is the pretty interesting article by Borjas and Doran with the title "Prizes and Productivity: How Winning the Fields Medal Affects Scientific Output" [4]. Besides, I think that we should not dwell on the comparison between Nobel and Fields in the first paragraph of the article. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 09:14, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Not only your reason is right,I myself believe that subject of "Comparison of Awards" would need a completely new wiki page, and a great deal of discussion.Rezameyqani (talk) 10:13, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
looks like it's been moved out from the first paragraph to the "conditions of the award" section. I approved it.Rezameyqani (talk) 17:37, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

What were the awards for?[edit]

This article is severely lacking w/o at least a brief sentence on what problem/research each Fields medal was given for. I see on this Talk page that someone brought this issue up 8 years ago, and it remains a huge glaring omission. It was the only reason I came to the page in the first place! Brightnsalty (talk) 19:15, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree. Even if the winners' work can be hard to understand in detail, a quick statement such as "For his work and developments in XXX" would be informative. --Joseluismb (talk) 20:39, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

@Brightnsalty, Joseluismb You're right. I really appreciate your efforts to make the table more readable and more importantly, a reliable one.Currently, I'm preparing an updated version of the above table in which your concern has been addressed. ThanksRezameyqani (talk) 23:05, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Group by countries in "Number of Fields Medallists by working institutions"[edit]

It seems the birthplace/nationality debate is somewhat settled. However, I reckon it would be a good idea to make a table grouping number of medals by countries according to the institutions in which the winners were at the time (perhaps even merging it with another table). This would be fair because it would inform about where are the leading research centres based, i.e., even if many of the prizes won by American or French universities were won by foreign mathematicians, it would be fair to recognize the countries' institutions.

This way, for the US we would have Princeton's 8 + Harvard's 4, etc.; for France, 7 from les Universités de Paris, 5 for IHÉS, etc.; for the UK, Cambridge's 4 + Oxford's 3, etc... Joseluismb (talk) 20:34, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

About "fields medalists table by country of origin" section.[edit]

Hello everyone, As some other editors mentioned above,with current changes in fields medalists table,the information in "fields medalists by country of origin" is somehow meaningless and may lead to misinterpretations. In my opinion,It'd be better to remove this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rezameyqani (talkcontribs) 24 August 2014


Maybe Wikipedia can avoid nationalist nonsense by just plain declining to participate in it? Getting rid of the flags was a great start, but I think you could go further. Do we really need birthplace in there? Is there any genuine relevance in that, aside from trivia for nationalists to scorekeep on? Dropping it would make the table less heavy (and it's very heavy). It crossed my mind to try lighten the table up more by dropping an affiliation column, but I guess they both have legitimate relevance beyond mere scorekeeping. And I probably gave someone a heart attack just by suggesting it, chuckle. A nitpick, some of the affiliation boxes are awkwardly tall due to triple listings - which I assume is just plain real world facts. If you did find some way to avoid that, it would be very nice to smooth that awkward edge off of a very heavy table. Alsee (talk) 01:27, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

When I first posted I didn't even see Medallists by country of origin and Fields_Medals_by_Affiliation at the bottom. Before I was merely commenting on flags and birthplace in the table. I just reviewed Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Icons#Flags and all of the flags on the page appear to be rather inappropriate. Do we really need Medallists by country of origin with medal icons stacked like trophies?? And stacking trophy icons on Medals by Affiliation isn't much better. I just removed Medallists by country of origin entirely, removed the flags and trophy icons from Fields_Medals_by_Affiliation, and I applied alphabetical sort order to any ties. Alsee (talk) 04:36, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree with all the edits made by Alsee. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 16:12, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Jitse Niesen, there were edits made to the article just moments before you commented here. Could you clarify whether you saw those changes?(nevermind) Thanx. Alsee (talk) 17:48, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
@Alsee (talk),Jitse Niesen (talk).OK.Whatever you do,please do not add "Nationality" column to the table,Since there is enough consensus to not put this on the table. Also, you can remove all of the flags from "Fields medalist by institution",but you do not need to change table format from sort-able to unsort-able or remove trophies. I believe It would be better to remove "Fields medalist by country of origins" section. If you could reach a consensus about it,remove that,too. Cheers Rezameyqani (talk) 20:06, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Rezameyqani, just to let you know, your comment appeared just as I was about to post a rather strong notice to people not revert without participating in talk, and I was about to revert your reverts on that explicit reason. I found it extremely ironic when your revert edit comment "invited" me to talk when I had done so, and you had failed to do so. I also find your comments above puzzling. Did you look at my edit or read the talk I left? Your comments here seem to be combatively agreeing with me! I am tempted to revert to my version, as I can find absolutely nothing in your comment disagreeing with what I did. However we are here talking, and I'd rather not amplify the reverts. I request you (and anyone else) to look at [this version] and tell me if there is anything about it you have a problem with. Alsee (talk) 20:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
@Alsee (talk) As I said above, you do not need to remove trophy-like icons from fields medalist by institution. Also there is no need to make that table unsort-able. That's all. And about reverting issue, that was my bad! sorry! Cheers Rezameyqani (talk) 20:45, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
@Rezameyqani Ok, we're all good now. My intent was to leave sort on for every column, and I'm pretty sure I did? As far as trophy-like icons, do we really need to present that table in such a glaringly competition-winner format? I think the focus should be on the Fields winners and their accomplishments, rather than trying to use the Fields winners as mere trophy-pawns. Alsee (talk) 21:17, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
@Alsee (talk) Those icons were used in the previous version of the page,i.e. the version before 15 Aug. 2014. I believe it would be better to put them there to show where the main flow of math is. Yet, if you can get a consensus on this matter, you can change the table and remove those icons. Thanks Rezameyqani (talk) 22:20, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
@Rezameyqani I accept that we still have different preferences on the icons. I'm going to revert the page back to my edit version - but note that I am doing it mainly so that other editors can immediately see what we are discussing. I am not trying to push my version as permanent. Alsee (talk) 23:04, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
@Rezameyqani I see you made some tweaks to the table contents. Would you be agreeable to making the temporary revert to my version? I don't want to mess up your work on the table contents. Alsee (talk) 23:13, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

@Alsee No problem. I agree.The tweaks were necessary since there were some errors on the table. Cheers Rezameyqani (talk) 10:58, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

@Rezameyqani I waited to see if anyone would jump in. It's been quiet. I merged your edits and my edits as discussed above. If you want to ping recent participants on Talk for input and consensus check, I'm good with that. Alsee (talk) 03:27, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Current/Last Affiliation[edit]

I'm not making any changes... I'm not arguing.... I'm just tossing a question out... what's the value in the Current/Last Affiliation column? I see it basically divided into two categories: There are people who are currently affiliated, and people who are dead or retired. If the person is dead or retired then their last affiliation seems just as arbitrary as their second-to-last affiliation. If the person is alive, I do see significance in noting that a Fields Metal winner is currently affiliated there, but this is information that can go stale. It just seems a very low quality column left over from when the table was keeping score by birthplace and nationality and whatever else. I'm not touching Current/Last Affiliation, but if it happens to go away I won't complain. Alsee (talk) 03:47, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

The Current/Last Affiliation column is not appropriate. In almost all cases, affiliation at the time of the award is considered important. Zenqueue (talk) 05:32, 17 May 2015 (UTC)


No doubt as a result of war-time disruption, the Fields medal was not awarded from 1936 to 1950. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:33, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Nobel and Fields[edit]

I see that there is too much comparison of the Fields Medal with the Nobel Prize on this article.

The Fields Medal should NOT be refereed as "Nobel Prize of Mathematics". What would you think if someone called the Nobel Prize in Chemistry as the "Fields Medal of Chemistry"? That is wrong...

Yes, talk about how prestigious it is, but there is no need to mention Nobel... — Preceding unsigned comment added by GloryEvans (talkcontribs) 02:36, 2 August 2015 (UTC)