Category talk:Integers

message: The following sort key system is used (please correct deviations from this system):
* 0 to 9 have sort keys 00 to 09 so they all sort under heading 0
* 10 to 99 have sort keys 1 0 to 9 9, inserting a space between the digits so they always sort before numbers with more digits 
* 100 to 999 need no explicit sort key (taking the article name, or any DEFAULTSORT, as the implicit sort key)
* 1000 and up: Each number n has sort key of form xEyy n, where:
** x is the first digit of n (so n sorts under that heading in the category).
** The letter E (or e, it doesn't matter) signals Scientific notation#E notation (for example 1e4 = 104).
** yy (with a leading 0 if needed) is the number of digits after the first digit, so numbers with more digits always sort after those with fewer digits.
** The sort key ends with a space followed by n itself, so numbers with same first digit and number of digits (meaning same xeyy) are sorted in normal increasing order.
** Example: 65536 (number) gets sort key 6e04 65536
This section is now historical, per #New numerical sorting below (that section dated 17 September 2016).  I've moved it below the fold, and signed.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 02:26, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Sort keys

message: True or false: the sub-categories of this category are useful. (This really isn't necessary because all the integers are put into the category Integers, and so are many of the kinds of numbers Wikipedia has articles for.) 66.245.79.136 21:03, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  True or false: Talk page comments that begin "True or false:" are annoying. - dcljr 06:07, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Subcategories

message: The following sort keys are used for the articles about specific integers to present the illusion of numeric sorting. -- Rick Block 03:43, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are 1 digit numbers a special case, sorted under 0?  After all, this scheme doesn't get numbers sorted numerically anyway.  Isn't the point to have all numbers starting with digit x grouped together, then sorted numerically within that grouping?  Dbenbenn 02:19, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorting the first ten under 0 groups them together.  Without doing this the single digit numbers would be scattered across the first digit indices (which IMO would make them harder to find).  We could do a scheme where ALL the integers are keyed under, say, 0, and all are in order.  This would require adding an explicit sort key to each article (the scheme as currently implemented required adding sort keys to only a small percentage of the articles). -- Rick Block 03:50, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: * Sounds good but how about using a bot to make the changes everywhere?  Radiant_* 08:08, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
See my comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers/Archive_2#Sort_key. – ABCD 00:55, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Sort keys

message: How about sorting the integers by number of digits first, then
string sorting after that?  This would give a convenient grouping
on magnitude as well...
1-digit numbers:
0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
2-digit numbers:
10, 11, ..., 99
3-digit numbers:
...
...
User:Jmason888 02:47, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  How about sorting by number of digits? 

message: So what is the basis for including the (number) disambiguation tag in very large numbers which do not correspond to years, like 144000 (number)? Obviously the conflict with years is not likely for several millenia, by which point we'll have surely revamped our disambiguation methods on the Galactic Wikipedia, so from whence does this come? All it provides is another hurdle for users to go through when linking to notable numbers. -- nae'blis (talk) 16:49, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  disambiguation tag 

message: where is it? :-) 62.56.50.124 18:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  23? 

message: These have got to be one of the least interesting and least relevant sections on WP.  Quiz: What have the years 18 BC, 18 AD, 1918 and 2018 to do with the number 18? Answer: they happen to have an "18" in them. What a very uninteresting thing. This is nothing but an artefact of how we name years and predictable to the point of being tedious. These sections don't even kick in till 10.  Why they kick in at all I can't fathom.  Let's get rid of them. JIMp talk·cont 05:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: They would clearly belong at 18 (disambiguation); as 18 and 18 BC are written "18", and 1918 and 2018 are written "'18".  Unless you want to write that, they belong at some article named "18".  And you're writing in the wrong place.  The comment would belong at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers or Wikipedia talk:Notability (numbers), if anywhere.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 07:39, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, let's move the discussion. JIMp talk·cont 08:13, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: moved JIMp talk·cont 09:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical years 

message: After a MediaWiki change this week (Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Sorting in categories unreliable for a few days), all articles starting with a number are sorted numerically under a common "0-9" heading where "9" comes "10" and so on if there are no sort keys. I therefore suggest all integer articles simply remove the sort key and let MediaWiki handle it. The category is currently a mess due to sort keys designed for the old system with alphabetical sorting. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:44, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the sortkeys. All integers now sort in numerical order as expected. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:20, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: And I've "collapsed" the last sort key algorithm in the lead of this talk page.  Other templates might be preferable, but I found one that isn't too bad.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 02:37, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  New numerical sorting 

message: In 12 (number), can somebody please elaborate a bit that sentence adding some examples? --Backinstadiums (talk) 13:36, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: 12 (number) says: "In English, twelve is the number of greatest magnitude that has just one syllable." It refers to the English name "twelve". No larger number has an English name with a single syllable when it's pronounced. For example, thir-teen has two syllables. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:47, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  the number of greatest magnitude