Archive of old discussions, including discussion of the terminology regarding Hindu-Arabic numerals.

Eequor has, in the process of moving this around and changing the table syntax, also added the fictional D'ni numerals. Is it really a good idea to include such a fictional numeral system with all the others? Lupo 09:37, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I agree that it shouldn't be in there. - Vague | Rant 02:49, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

Yup, it doesn't belong here. —Michael Z. 2005-01-23 19:15 Z

Frankly, I was amused to find D'Ni there and it seems to fit in with a lot of Wikipedians' orientation towards Sci-Fi fiction, but I won't argue for it or against it other than to say I found it amusing.

But I did just add Binary, Octal, and Hexidecimal based on the facts that:

• They are real numeral systems, and
• The individual articles describes them as "numeral systems".

On these two bases, I think they "rate" inclusion here.

Atlant 21:11, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I've re-added D'ni numerals, but with a '(fictional)' disclaimer. Is that suitable? I just think that someone interested in numeral systems might be interested in ones created by folks, in addition to those created by civilizations.

If there are enough fictional numeral systems out there, we could create a new section in the template for them. How's that suit everyone?

SFT 15:21, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

I think it's okay to include D'ni numerals, but I'd probably segregate them into a new sub-box entitled "Fictional systems" or "Artificial systems" or some such.

Atlant 16:25, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I recently removed the D'ni as SF cruft, but I was reverted and pointed to this talk. Obviously we all agree that it doesn't belong in the same list as others. More importantly, it simply is not a part of the same series of articles, which this box is supposed to be about. I'm removing it again. There are other ways to link to D'ni - there is Numeral system, category:Numeration, we can even have a list of numeral systems. Zocky 15:30, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would be all for segregating it into a different section of the box, if it weren't the only fictitious numeral system we're dealing with. (A one-item list doesn't seem very sensible.) However, I don't agree that the box must contain only "real-life" systems. There is no reason to assume that people looking at this box would not be interested in unique numeral systems in fiction.

I agree that too many kB of Wikipedia is taken up by the microscopic details of fiction franchises. I think the Myst articles themselves number about 500% too many. However, the numeral system is interesting and substantial enough to warrant its own article, and indeed to warrant the attention of passersby interested in numeral systems.

If you want to create a new section in the box for "Fictional systems" that contains (at this point) only D'ni, then that's fine. But I think it would be a disservice to folks interested in numeral systems to omit it completely. SFT 22:25, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

While it chokes me to have to say so, there are probably more people familiar with D'ni than with Babylonian numerals which we all agree should be on the list. DV8 2XL 22:33, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've contributed to many articles about works of fiction and components thereof, and even created templates linking such articles together. But I think that including the D'ni numerals article in what is presumably supposed to be a serious series of articles about numeral systems isn't a very good idea. This series of articles should cover important and influential systems of numerals throughout history, helping to link the articles to show their evolution and use of these systems. I am also against creating a separate section in the template for fictional numeral systems—they don't add to the value of these articles as a series. Not only are they artifical constructions, but they are essentially unused, except for the fiction they were created for. Having them in the template is equivalent to someone adding articles about speculative "future histories" to a series of history articles. I agree with Zocky, just make an all-inclusive List of numeral systems with all the real ones, and a separate section for fictional ones. While I'm completely fine with the article D'ni numerals existing in Wikipedia as a whole, leave it out of this template. —siroχo 22:45, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I see no reason why this template has to be limited to "important and influential" numeral systems. If someone comes to Wikipedia and is interested in numeral systems, they may be just as interested in fictitious ones as they are in ones used by real civilizations. There are aspects of D'ni numerals that someone who's interested in numeral systems in general might find useful/interesting/what-have-you. SFT | Talk 07:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean, and for the most part agree, which is why D'ni numerals should be in a list if one is made, and in the category. However, I think the point of these side-bar type list templates is for creating series of articles, rather than all-inclusive lists of topics. I think the point of this one should be to offer some sort of history of numeral systems. This isn't any type of jab at the topic or article at hand, it's a good article about a fine topic. I'm just worried the template might end up becoming a list instead of a more useful sort of guide. (: —siroχo 10:33, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The usefulness of spelling out all those long words like "quadrosexagesimal" is questionable. If someone wants to know the fancy word for "Base 64" he can look at the article, right? It should be shortened with a table, like Template:Cyrillic alphabet navbox, and links to "2" "3" "4" "10" etc. Any thoughts? Ashibaka tock 03:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Perhaps even just a comma-separated list instead of a table. SFT | Talk 03:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed It makes a complete mess of the base N pages such as Hexadecimal moving all real content out of sight. Perhaps, it could be shortened to a link to a new page that contains its current contents and then some category statement. Karl Palmen 13:25, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Today I find that the template is shown on the right-hand side of the page (as usual?) and so its length is not such an important issue as it was yesterday. Karl Palmen 11:55, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above suggestion applies to older versions of the template. However, I still think the template is very long, more than a screen. What should we do about it? I tried making the first list semicolon separated instead of the narrow format; it looked rather ugly and was reverted. A possibility would be to divide the template into two, corresponding to the two sections of the present template. One focuses on the cultural history of numeral systems, the other on the mathematics of numeral systems (as it happens, all are positional systems, in the broad sense, including e.g unary). If you like this idea, what should we call those two templates? - By the way, the category "Positional numeral systems" might need to be renamed; it is not meant to include articles like Hindu-Arabic numerals (system) (in the cultural section) and Tally marks (that ought to be in the cultural section), though they deal with implementations of the Decimal resp. Unary numeral systems (that are in the mathematical section, and in that category). So a good name for the mathematical part of the template might inspire a good new name for the category.--Niels Ø 21:20, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to Tally marks, the template(s) ought to include the articles Bi-quinary coded decimal, Rod numerals (under Chinese), and Pentimal system (if that article is worth anything - it's too short even for a stub).--Niels Ø 21:35, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the information could be moved to List of numeral system topics, which could then be linked from the template. Karl 15:50, 8 March 2006 UTC

Indeed it could, but having this table on each page is a nice user-friendly way of doing it, except for the fact that the table is too long. Can anyone figure out how to make the entries from Abjad to D'ni appear in two columns; making the table just a little bit wider, this would solve the problem (I think)? I've tried, but I don't understand wiki table pipes well enough.--Niels Ø 06:44, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've just made it a bit worse, adding two more non-standard systems. Perhaps we should instead remove all the non-standard systems from the template, except for the link to Non-standard positional numeral systems? But I think at least Unary would still deserve a link of its own. Perhaps it a bit too much that we have: Three categories:

• Category:Numeration
• Category:Positional numeral systems
• Category:Non-standard positional numeral systems

Four articles, including a list:

• Numeral systems
• Positional notation
• Non-standard positional numeral systems
• List of numeral system topics

And a template:

• Template:Numeral systems

Here's a suggestion: The categories are fine, the List of numeral system topics is redundant at can be deleted, the template should be divided into three (all of which should include links to the other two):

1. Template:Numeral systems in practical use (systems in real use outside of recent mathematics and computer science, most listed by culture)
2. Template:Standard positional numeral systems (listed by base)
3. Template:Non-standard positional numeral systems

E.g., Babylonian numerals and Tally marks would be listed on template 1, Sexagesimal on template 2, and Unary on template 3. If no objections appear here - or suggestions of better names for the templates - I'll probably split the template as indicated one of these days.--Niels Ø 06:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC) Having checked List of numeral system topics and Computer numbering formats, here's some links that might be added: Computer numbering formats; Gray code; Binary-coded decimal; Signed number representations; Two's complement; Radix; Radix point; Pentimal system; Bi-quinary coded decimal; Algorism; Goodstein's theorem; Myriad. I haven't figured out how to include all those.--Niels Ø 09:24, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The numeral systems are not all ordered the same way. The Arabic and Thai are classified by family (Hindu-Arabic system), whereas the Attic and Ionian are classified by their belonging to a civilization (Greek). Why not using this last way for each numeral system ? Example:

Hindu-Arabic system

• History

Arabic

• Ajbad
• Estern Arabic
• Western Arabic

...

Indian

• Brahmi

...

Baleer 26 mai 2006 à 17:08