Talk:Kaktovik numerals

Inuit vs Inuktitut
"Inuit" is the name of the people and "Inuktitut" the name of a language, as I understand it - in this article, "Inuit" is used as a language name a few times.

However, I don't want to replace those mentions of "Inuit" with "Inuktitut" because not all speakers of Eskimo-Aleut languages call their spoken variety "Inuktitut". Ideally, someone more familiar with the situation should amend the article appropriately. -- pne (talk) 15:05, 8 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Inuktitut is the Canadian word, it would not be appropriate for the Alaskan context 129.67.111.33 (talk) 12:19, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Move Inuit numerals to Kaktovik Inupiaq numerals
Please, moved from Inuit numerals to Kaktovik Inupiaq numerals or Inupiat numerals. The name "Inuit" is official name of Canadian Eskimos. But, the official and popular common name of Alaskan Inuits are Inupiat (true orthography: Iñupiat). The true name of numerals is "Kaktovik Inupiaq numerals" The primarly reference is "http://www.ankn.uaf.edu/sop/SOPv2i1.html". The Inupiat people, the Inupiat language and the Inupiat numerals --Kmoksy (talk) 06:39, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

computation in the side box
I have no time to go through this thoroughly, but it appears to me that there is a problem with the computation in the first side box. I don't have the unicode signs but it seems that whats translated as 30561 should be 30461 and 501 should be translated as 401, but then the computation doesn't work anymore. I didn't check the second box. ???

Sub-bases
What are sub-bases.Can someone explain it to me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alhadialika (talk • contribs) 21:55, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Separate issue: is the current thinking really that 5 is a sub-base because of the grouping of animal skins rather than the biological fact that humans have 5 fingers on each hand? - Eponymous-Archon (talk) 22:42, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

No. If anything, it's the opposite. We don't have a word 'dozen' because that's how eggs are packaged, but rather we pack eggs by the dozen because that's a base for counting. The sub-base is almost certainly because people count on five fingers. — kwami (talk) 22:07, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Unicode encoding
As of 16 June 2019, LaserYukon in Unicode, a commercial font by Linguist's Software, is the only known font that encodes the Kaktovik Inupiaq Numerals. The LaserYukon in Unicode font makes use of two distinct ranges within the Unicode Private Use Area range.

This font uses codepoints U+E5A0 through U+E5B3 for displaying Kaktovik numerals in a regular font weight, and separately uses the range U+E5C0 through U+E5D3 for displaying the Kaktovik numerals in a bold font weight. These ranges have been previously registered in the Conscript Unicode Registry, although it is unclear whether the respective constructed scripts (SSÛRAKI and GARGOYLE) are currently in use.

Dowobeha (talk) 20:38, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the table, I was just about to look and see if Unicode had these signs already. I will copy this table to the main page, I find it important information! --WiseWoman (talk) 17:00, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Someone actually made a font to display the numbers natively. Really neat. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 01:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

There's a block provisionally allocated to them in the SMP (U+1D2C0-1D2DF). The private codes above are trivia and don't belong on WP. There's no connection to the Conscript Registry. — kwami (talk) 03:00, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Moved to talk page
There was a section

"Further reading"
 * How to pronounce Kaktovik Iñupiaq numerals

that I have moved here, as that is just a bot-produced page. --WiseWoman (talk) 17:04, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that's garbage. — kwami (talk) 02:59, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

are these external links useful?
KI FONT

KI CONVERTER

EdwardLane (talk) 14:12, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * No, and it would only work with the PUA assignments they gave them. — kwami (talk) 04:57, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Listed in numeral systems as "former"
When did it fall out of use? A paragraph explaining the demise of such a pleasant system should be added. 121.45.171.107 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

✅--Akrasia25 (talk) 13:19, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I was wrong to list it as 'former'. Still in use in 2021. — kwami (talk) 02:57, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Move to Iñupiaq numerals
This page should be changed from Kaktovik Iñupiaq numerals to simply "Iñupiaq numerals". They are used not only by Kaktovik, but in other Iñupiaq communities. Elders have also advised this name change 24.148.7.52 (talk) 17:54, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Evidence? Everyone appears to use "Kaktovik", including the elders. "Inupiaq numerals" wouldn't be appropriate because that means something else (namely, the numerals of Inupiaq). — kwami (talk) 02:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * A Google search finds 19,200 results for "Iñupiaq numerals" and only 7,180 results for "Kaktovik numerals". When I was in Utqiaġvik in 2017, the Elders we spoke with advised they should be called Iñupiaq numerals rather than Kaktovik numerals, since they are used outside of just Kaktovik. 24.69.133.124 (talk) 01:58, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Evidence?

I only get 1,890 hits for "Iñupiaq numerals" on Google (vs 388 for "Kaktovik numerals"), but 1,860 for "Kaktovik Iñupiaq numerals". Which leaves only 30 for "Iñupiaq numerals". (Omniglot being one.) — kwami (talk) 01:04, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 1 February 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved  (t &#183; c)  buidhe  18:57, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Kaktovik numerals → Iñupiaq numerals – Though devised in Kaktovik, the numerals are used in several Iñupiaq communities today, including Utiqiaġvik. A Google search finds 19,200 results for "Iñupiaq numerals" and only 7,180 results for "Kaktovik numerals". Elders in Utqiaġvik has advised advised they should be called Iñupiaq numerals rather than Kaktovik numerals, since they are used outside of just Kaktovik. 24.69.133.124 (talk) 03:46, 1 February 2021 (UTC) 24.69.133.124 (talk) 03:46, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose Books and texts still refer to these as Kaktovik numerals as that is where they originated. We could add something in the lead like (also known as Inupiaq Numerals)--Akrasia25 (talk) 14:31, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd like to see attestation of that in RS's, since that phrase would normally mean something else. — kwami (talk) 04:43, 2 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Beside the fact that all sources I've seen call them "Kaktovik" or "Kaktovik Iñupiaq", Iñupiaq numerals are something else entirely -- the numerals of Iñupiaq. Also, Kaktovik numerals are not specific to Iñupiaq but support all Eskimo-Aleut languages of Alaska and Canada, and have been recommended by the Inuit Circumpolar Council, which would make the name "Iñupiaq numerals" rather jingoistic. No evidence provided for what the "elders in Utqiaġvik" say -- the elders in Utqiaġvik I've spoken to use the name "Kaktovik".
 * In addition, your numbers are bad. I redid the Google search, and got 1,860 hits for "Kaktovik Iñupiaq numerals", 388 hits for "Kaktovik numerals" and only 30 hits for "Iñupiaq numerals" (Omniglot being one). On Google Books, which is a more appropriate search, I got 59 hits for "Kaktovik numerals" (2 confirmed), 23 hits for "Kaktovik Iñupiaq numerals" (2 confirmed), and only 3 hits for "Iñupiaq numerals" (0 confirmed). One of the confirmed hits used both (that is, it came up twice), so we actually have 1 source for "Kaktovik Iñupiaq numerals", 1 for "Kaktovik numerals", and 1 for both.


 * Support. I think your Google search numbers are incorrect. Even with parentheses, there are 2,760 results for "Inupiaq numerals" and only 393 for "Kaktovik numerals." The Elders who advised using the Iñupiaq numerals in Utqiaġvik were members of the Iñupiat History Language and Culture Commission. This preference for this name has only been in the last five years, so it would be unlikely to be showing up in Google Books results. The jingoism argument doesn't make sense, because using the singular community of Kaktovik would raise the exact same issue. Perhaps a compromise could be "Kaktovik Iñupiaq numerals", but it just doesn't make sense to call them Kaktovik numerals without the larger association. 24.69.133.124 (talk) 02:09, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * BTW, early accounts by William Clark Bartley used "Kaktovik Iñupiaq numerals". More recent ones use "Kaktovik numerals". The recent Unicode proposal, co-authored by a teacher that uses them, calls them "Kaktovik numerals". Though not a RS, the Unicode block in the roadmap is also "Kaktovik numerals". — kwami (talk) 00:45, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Still oppose Regarding William Clark Bartley. When I was researching this topic and looking for background articles I tracked down William Clark Bartley and spoke to him in Arizona. He is long retired but he told me about the amazing efforts of the Kaktovik children. The numerals are first a great invention by Kaktovik and advance our understanding of anthropology and math. It is nice to see that they are being picked up throughout the north and maybe someday the name can morph but I think that it is just too soon. --Akrasia25 (talk) 13:17, 2 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose but set up the redirect. The common name seems in doubt, and it's too soon to apply wp:NAMECHANGES. The other arguments in support of the move seem to have no support in the article naming policy. Andrewa (talk) 17:14, 8 February 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅--Akrasia25 (talk) 00:08, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

 * thank you. Would be my very first DYK article. --Akrasia25 (talk) 18:14, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Kaktovik Iñupiaq Numerals
This page should also include the variant names of Kaktovik numerals: Kaktovik Iñupiaq Numerals and Iñupiaq numerals, as they are also referred to in the most definitive source for Iñupiaq language, Dr. Edna Ahgeak Maclean's Iñupiaq dictionary. Naulagmi (talk) 21:54, 10 December 2021 (UTC)


 * 17 tokens of "Kaktovik numeral(s)" (including all table headings), 2 tokens of "Kaktovik Iñupiaq numerals". They never refer to them as just "Iñupiaq numerals". — kwami (talk) 22:57, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Displaying the characters in the article
At present, there is no actual representation of the characters themselves, just four graphics that display them. I think the article would be enhanced by actually having the characters in the section on their Unicode encoding, using Unicode chart Kaktovik Numerals. Also, existing tables in this article contradict MOS:TABLECAPTION, which makes it less accessible. When I added one, another user took out a table caption. Do other users think this article should 1.) display the actual characters in the section on their encoding and 2.) follow accessibility guidelines such as MOS:TABLECAPTION? Thanks. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:02, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd recommend text only for the Unicode block itself, using the standard block template. Elsewhere I'm not so sure.  Other articles on uncommon writing systems often have a column for an image, a column for the text, and a column explaining what it means. DRMcCreedy (talk) 22:22, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * To be clear, I'm only asking about the section regarding the Unicode block: I am not asking if all instances of SVGs should be replaced directly with characters. At present, the characters never appear at all in the article and SVG images (not fonts) appear four times. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:32, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * That simplifies it. I feel the Unicode section shouldn't use images.  It's literally the Unicode section, it should contain Unicode text. DRMcCreedy (talk) 03:42, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

That statement is incorrect: there are both. If you copy and paste, you get the actual Unicode characters. A screen reader will see the actual Unicode characters. But because browsers cannot (yet) display them, the page coding needs to supply the graphics as well. This is something that the browser normally handles. In other articles on Unicode blocks, we also have both the Unicode characters and their graphic display, it's just that the graphic display is automated. That doesn't work here, so we need a manual workaround.

(Actually, to be more precise, the characters themselves are currently only available through the graphics. Without the graphics, we only see the code points without the characters themselves.)

Re. DRMcCreedy's comment I agree -- which is why it does contain Unicode text. It has both.

As for other scripts, they usually have fonts available. Any particular reader may not have a supporting font, but they can always download and install one, which is why we'll post a note saying that may be necessary. But in this case there is no such font. Or, to be more accurate, there is one, a personal font that is available in the external links section. But installing it won't cause the browser to display the characters. I sent that font to the Phabricator a while back, and hopefully they'll add it to Wikimedia sometime soon so that readers can see Kaktovik numerals. If/when that happens, or when other fonts become available, we'll be able to remove the graphics here. But until that happens, removing the graphics will guarantee that any sans-graphic sections of this article will be useless to readers.

I'll give an example of the current coding:

The first element is the graphic file for display, the third is the Unicode character for copy-paste or screen readers. But as you can see, by itself it only displays as a box with its Unicode point. "𝋃" by itself is therefore useless, even if you have the world's only Unicode Kaktovik font installed. All "𝋃" currently does is tell you that Unicode character U+1D2C3 is at code point 1D2C3.

In another article, we'll enter Unicode character U+0043 in a table, and the browser will produce the graphic display "A". But if you highlight and copy it, you get the Unicode code point; when you then paste it, your browser or word processor will convert it into a graphic display for legibility. If all the browser did was display "0043", our articles would be gibberish and we'd need some other solution.

If either of you has an idea for how to make this article legible without using graphic files -- that is, if you know of a way to display "the characters themselves" and not just their code points, that would be wonderful -- please share. We can replace the graphics with your solution throughout the entire article.

— kwami (talk) 03:57, 27 January 2023 (UTC)


 * It does not contain the characters. Open the page, press Ctrl+F, search for <𝋃>, get zero results. The characters are not represented on the page. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:43, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I just tried that and got 21 hits. For that single character.
 * I copied the table in question, pasted it into a spreadsheet, and this is what I got:
 * Kaktovik Numerals
 * Official Unicode Consortium code chart (PDF)
 * 0 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  A  B  C  D  E  F
 * U+1D2Cx 𝋀  𝋁  𝋂  𝋃  𝋄  𝋅  𝋆  𝋇  𝋈  𝋉  𝋊  𝋋  𝋌  𝋍  𝋎  𝋏
 * U+1D2Dx 𝋐  𝋑  𝋒  𝋓
 * I copied the last character from the table graphics (not from here), pasted it into Wiktionary search, and was taken here.
 * Anyway, even if you're using a browser that can't locate the characters, the primary need of an article is that it be legible. Anything else is secondary. Again, open to any suggestions that do what you want while still being legible. — kwami (talk) 18:13, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I would suggest using the standard Unicode block template with a second, clearly labeled table showing images. Your ad hoc, hybrid table does work for cut and paste but fails to show the actual text.  I was confused why the characters appeared when I had no supporting font installed. It took some research to determine that unlike the 300+ other Unicode block charts, this one was using images. The linked PDF in the block template will show me the characters without any font needed.  I view the block template as text based, allowing me to see what my device will display for the given text. Another concern comes in when I DO have a font installed.  Instead of seeing that font's rendering of Unicode text, as expected, I'll see those images instead.  So again, I think if you want images, they should be in a second table. I'll buy the legibility argument for the rest of the article but not for the block template itself.  DRMcCreedy (talk) 18:37, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Does this look sensible to you? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kaktovik_numerals&oldid=1135653057#In_Unicode ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:52, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * <𝋃> does not appear on this page. It only appears in the source of the web page as a title or alt text for images. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:52, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes. You'd said to "open the page", and if you open the page, the 'find' function finds the characters with no problem. But correct, the average reader won't do that, and so 'find' won't work.
 * I've opened a request on Phabricator for that functionality to be added. It's not just here: there are other WP articles with characters that have poor font support, where we use graphics for reader accessibility, and in those cases as well the graphics should ideally be searchable.
 * I think your solution is fine. I'll restore it myself since I'm the one who reverted you.
 * As for your other concern, in this case you DON'T have a font installed. At least not one that will display in your browser. That's uncommon. Usually installing a font will enable your browser to display that set of characters.
 * Can you tell if there's anything wrong with the font in the external links section, such as it not correctly identifying to the browser the code range it supports? If that's the problem, we can correct the font and have it uploaded at that external site, so that readers downloading it in the future will have proper support. Once that works, I wouldn't mind removing the graphics from the bulk of the article. — kwami (talk) 19:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It also has zero hits if you just display the page in a web browser. The character is not present in this web page. It not only does not display but cannot be displayed. As for the font in the external links, I cannot install that font on the machine I'm using, so I can't answer that question. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I've asked at the Village Pump. — kwami (talk) 01:04, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Graphics or Unicode
In a recent edit, small images of the numerals were replaced in the text with what I assume is Unicode characters.

I am probably not the only one now seeing identical empty rectangles in place of the proper characters.

So, Nø (talk) 10:16, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) How do I update my broswer (Chrome), computer (Win11), or whatvever, to see the proper characters?
 * 2) Is the change a good idea, or will too many like me not see the intended characters, and not know how to fix it?


 * I submitted a web font to Phabricator last year, and a few days ago the characters started to display properly on my computer. I assumed the web font had been implemented on Wikimedia and started deleting the images. However, it seems I was wrong -- it's still pending. I have no idea why my browser would suddenly start displaying these characters; it's not like I installed any new fonts, and it's on all my browsers whether or not I'm logged in. Since I don't know why I can see the characters now, I can't advise what you should do. But hopefully the folks at Phabricator will take care of this soon. (I tried doing it myself, but found the instructions confusing.) — kwami (talk) 10:23, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Shame you did so much work but the article looks a little rough now. Give it a few days or revert the web fonts?? --Akrasia25 (talk) 21:21, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * If they're gonna take another year, we should have the graphics.
 * Or maybe find someone here who can implement the web font on Phabricator? — kwami (talk) 01:07, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Penta-vigesimal
"Pentavigesimal" means base 25 according to most sources (including Wikipedia). It's confusing to label Kaktovik and Maya numerals as "penta-vigesimal". I know there are a small number of sources that use that term when describing Kaktovik, but they are far outweighed by sources that describe it as "vigesimal". Regarding Maya numerals I'm not aware of any sources at all that describe it as "penta-vigesimal", regardless of it's similarity to Kaktovik. Applying that term to Maya is original research. I think we are much better off just describing them as "base 20, subbase 5" (or something similar), rather than using a confusing term like "penta-vigesimal". Nosferattus (talk) 16:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Base 25 would be quinvigesimal. According to McClean's 2014 Iñupiatun Uqaluit Taniktun Sivuninit /Iñupiaq to English Dictionary, "penta-vigesimal" is base 20 with a sub-base of 5, and I've seen the same for the Mayan system. If you do a search for "penta-vigisimal" on GBooks, the first several hits are about Inuit and Mayan systems. But I've also seen "quinary-vigesimal" in 19th-century works, and that might be more approachable for our readers.
 * Normally we don't mix Latin and Greek in these words, except that "hexadecimal" has become common as a euphemism for "sexadecimal" (more properly "sedecimal"). WP is not a RS, and the source WP uses for those terms also claims multiple nonstandard digits for these higher systems. I would be interested if they are used by anyone else or even have Unicode support. — kwami (talk) 00:02, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * There have been some proposals by others (easily Googlable) to extend these nonce digits into the thousands. I'm not however aware of much actual usage independent of the originator: in general the letters a-z in either case are used as digits as usual even among people who discuss alternate bases on the internet. Unless it's duodecimal, where you may see Sir Isaac Pitman's digits, but those are in Unicode. Double sharp (talk) 17:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Proposal showing those digit shapes. – . Raven .talk 20:18, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Those are Sir Isaac Pitman's digits, not Michael de Vlieger's (which Kwami was talking about). They have the same ten, but different elevens. Double sharp (talk) 06:39, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I was responding to your last previous sentence. 🙂 –  . Raven .talk 07:23, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I searched again (including on GBooks) and found no sources describing Mayan numerals as "penta-vigesimal". I found 1 source in Spanish that describes Aztec numerals as "penta-vigesimal". Please show me your sources. Searching for Maya and vigesimal gives hundrends of matches, however. The rest of your argument is original research. Nosferattus (talk) 03:22, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Are you saying the numerical bases of the Aztec and Mayan systems were different?
 * Anyway, we have RS's that the Kaktovik system is "penta-vigesimal", and that the Mayan system has the same base. That's not OR per WP:SKYISBLUE. We're just saying the Mayan system is another system like the Kaktovik system.
 * There are more sources that call these systems "quinary-vigesimal", so that might be better, but if you're a stickler for OR, that's a problem because AFAICT they don't use it specifically for Kaktovik. So if we're going to use the same word for the same base, we have a potential problem either way. — kwami (talk) 03:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree that WP:SKYISBLUE should allow us to use synonyms. That said, I would prefer the word "quinary-vigesimal" in both cases: I think it is more explicit. Double sharp (talk) 06:38, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Works for me. — kwami (talk) 12:40, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I keep finding "pentavigesimal" defined as base-25, e.g., , ,.
 * It's used to mean base-20, with steps of 5, in one context, Kaktovik numerals, and that dates back to a letter the class got from the late Robert Petersen (Univ. Greenland)... whose field was Eskimology, not math. Echoing comment here. – . Raven .talk 09:00, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Do you have any RS's for it as base 25?
 * It's also used to mean base 20, sub-base 5 in the context of Mesoamerican numerals. — kwami (talk) 12:40, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * In the context of all Mesoamerican cultures' numerals? RS, please. –  . Raven .talk 07:41, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * "Quinary-vigesimal", with over 50 Ghits, avoids the overlap and expresses its meaning more clearly. Thank you for your edit. – . Raven .talk 20:28, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * For your and others' ease of comparison, I put a table in my userspace comparing the current list of terms with five websites for base-conversion. Again, I have no dog in the race. You can click the site names at top to see their content for yourselves. I've marked with big asterisks those kwami gave on the mainspace list. –  . Raven .talk 16:08, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Restored graphics
I really hoped the web font I supplied would be enabled by now, but it appears it hasn't (though I can read these digits just fine, so it's hard for me to tell). Kaktovik numbers are featuring on ABC and NBC affiliates in Alaska tonight, so I restored the graphics so that the expected spike in viewers will be able to read the article. When the web font has been implemented (it's been approved and is just waiting for someone to take the time to do it), we can restore the text version of the article. — kwami (talk) 04:08, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
 * That is great- thanks for doing that. the profile on news outlets will give more RS too I bet. --Akrasia25 (talk) 15:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

New example image
The 2002 Bartley article includes the Iñupiaq number-words alongside the new symbols/signs and Arabic numerals (Fig. 21.2). I think the current example image at the top of this page should be replaced with that one. Bartley's article is publicly available here. Vyeh3 (talk) 18:41, 17 April 2024 (UTC)


 * That book appears to by copyrighted with all rights reserved. CMD (talk) 01:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * You can't copyright letters and digits. But I wouldn't want to replace a good image w a limited-res scan.
 * We could add the Iñupiaq numerals to the current img if we wanted. — kwami (talk) 04:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I think adding them would be best. I was doing so in illustrator when I also noticed the name used for zero in this page's table is different from the 2002 article. Unsure which would be preferred. Vyeh3 (talk) 08:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
 * That would make it language-specific, though. If this were WP-ik, that would make sense, but if we were WP-iu, we'd use that language. We don't label Arabic numerals with their Italian or Arabic values, and Devanagari numerals are labeled in a table with three different languages. — kwami (talk) 15:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)