Talk:Atle Selberg

Erdos dispute
The AMS source is an interview, which fails WP:PRIMARY. The Erdos article has plenty of conflicting references. The description in the article is misleading, even as a summary of the content in the AMS article. It's clear from Selberg's own words that he didn't have a proof until Erdos started working with him. But, this is all WP:OR and we need secondary sources to interpret. Glaucus (talk) 15:49, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Very well. I think you will then agree that we can rely on
 * to assert that the proofs of Erdős and Selberg both relied on Selberg's then unpublished asymptotic formula (the uncontroversial point that was trying to be made). &mdash; Myasuda (talk) 14:37, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * to assert that the proofs of Erdős and Selberg both relied on Selberg's then unpublished asymptotic formula (the uncontroversial point that was trying to be made). &mdash; Myasuda (talk) 14:37, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

1937
Proof, other than Atle Selberg's own word, is needed for the claim that Selberg had an exact expression for the partition function before Rademacher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.13.44 (talk) 09:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

the "most" famous and influential of his results
Why is the Selberg trace formula the most famous and influential of his results? I get that it is famous and influential. But so are other results like the Selberg sieve or the Selberg integral.--Tensorproduct (talk) 09:10, 21 August 2022 (UTC)