Talk:Quadrillion

Please see my discussion of Names for Large Numbers. -- Stephen001

That page cannot be found
I clicked on the above link and it says that it doesn't exist.

Trillion
This article uses Trillion twice, and means different values each time!!! This is inconsistent and must be corrected. Ian Cairns 01:57, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Did you remember...
...when Wikipedia had articles for larger numbers?? Now they survive as re-directs to Names of large numbers after a time on Vfd. Any discussion on what to do with this article?? 66.245.89.130 02:01, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Fixed
The article has a table of contents now, so I removed the stub tag. It's not a stub anymore! We can leave it be now.Scythe33

Merging this article with names of large numbers
Do you support or oppose merging this with names of large numbers?


 * Oppose. Most links to quadrillion in Wikipedia want information about the actual number, not the name. This article mentions things that names of large numbers does not and cannot mention. Merging it leads to bad consequences such as 10^15 redirecting to names of large numbers when it isn't a name at all. Voortle Voortle 15:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I can't find any useful content in the article, so merging seems the best. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 09:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Contradiction
This article states that the traditional British definition of a quadrillion is $$10^{18}$$, whereas the Names of large numbers page states $$10^{24}$$. Following the logic of the old system this page seems to be at fault, but with no references I am reluctant to change the page. Can someone with more knowledge on the matter check which is correct? RossMM 23:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You're right, so I changed the page. I checked it against the Oxford English Dictionary to be sure. Thanks. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 00:17, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for clearing that up. RossMM 16:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

This Article Used to be Large - What Happened to It?
What happened to this article that now consists of basically 2 sentences? It used to be an extensive article... Did the Wikipedia reductionists show up again? Stevenmitchell (talk) 15:55, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

No citations
The stub article makes some bold claims without citation. What are the numbers of English speakers using the different definitions proffered? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.208.49.21 (talk) 15:23, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

short scale countries
All English speaking countries use the short scale. "Short scale countries" is a weird phrase that tells the reader nothing. Also definitions in wikipedia are always the English definition unless otherwise noted. Bhny (talk) 18:36, 8 December 2014 (UTC)