This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Names of large numbers article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 6 months ![]() |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on July 14, 2006. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
Disoge has 10 zeros 77.100.228.242 (talk) 19:36, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Why no table in the article mentions the thousand? That is a pretty big number, isn't it...? --CiaPan (talk) 08:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
It is not usually "Googolplexplex". It is more scientifically called "Googolplexian" Number Numismatist (talk) 19:48, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
The other day I added a description for this article which was quickly reverted claiming it was vandalism. Are there any maintainers of this article that believe that my edit was in fact, vandalism? BurninButter (talk) 12:51, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
10^51 has been incorrectly named Sedecillion, when it's actual name is Sexdecillion. It is just missing the x before the d. 2600:4040:56EA:9500:99FD:1338:153C:1D29 (talk) 08:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Today, sexdecillion and novemdecillion are standard dictionary numbers and, using the same reasoning as Conway and Guy did for the numbers up to nonillion, could probably be used to form acceptable prefixes.
For the googol family section we can add much more. (such as a Gargoogol, 10^200) Although my account cannot edit this page so if someone could skim through the fandom wiki and find some good numbers to add I think it will be a great addition to the page. Real Baguette (talk) 00:58, 29 March 2025 (UTC)
There appears to be a (fairly major) error, unless I'm missing something. In the Units / Tens / Hundreds prefix table, the units = 5 prefix is given as Quinqua. In the big table a little further down, entries in row numbers 15, 25, and 35 (and no others) have a 5 in the units place, and so they use this prefix, BUT the words given in those rows have a prefix of QUIN, rather than QUINQUA as specified in the prefix table.
That this discrepancy could occur is not that surprising. Conway and Guy's original system uses QUINQUA for units = 5, but a later analysis in 2003 of Latin usage by Olivier Miakinen (see https://www.miakinen.net/vrac/zillions) concluded that QUIN is more accurate (and at the same time shorter, which I think is part of its appeal), and so "the Conway/Guy system except with QUIN instead of QUINQUA" has become very popular. Indeed, I think that QUIN is almost always seen now. Some more background on this is here: https://kyodaisuu.github.io/illion/index.html.
So either (a) the prefix table needs to be changed to have QUIN (which should have an asterisk or something to point to a note saying something along of lines of "Conway and Guy originally used QUINQUA but as a result of Miakinen's suggestion QUIN is mostly used nowadays"), or (b) the prefix table is left as it is and the names in lines 15, 25, and 35 in the big table should have QUIN replaced with QUINQUA. The goal is for the prefix table and big table to be consistent. I would vote for the option (a), since QUIN is imho better and also more common now. For another example which uses QUIN see the table here: https://www.olsenhome.com/bignumbers/. Obviously option (b) is simpler and avoids bringing up the whole "QUIN or QUINQUA" question, but then readers would be confused that the big table here doesn't match the names in (many) other sources. Ondiagonal (talk) 00:34, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
Suggest taking the first paragraph from the same article at simple.wikipedia.org and putting it at the top of this article. It's simple and clear, and all most readers will want to know. 2603:7080:D83D:813C:2C93:AB62:773:D1F5 (talk) 14:12, 9 July 2025 (UTC)