Talk:Decimal

message: Consider adding the following text to the intro of the article, as discussing the limitations of the base 10 system would be beneficial for readers curious about such information regarding it. The text is in brackets. [Though the decimal (base 10) system is widely used, it is not free of criticism. As 10 is only divisible by itself, 1, 2, and 5, proponents of other base number systems (such as base 12) would argue that using a base number with more factors would make math simpler (as 3, 4, and 6 go perfectly into a dozen). (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duodecimal)]
:This article is about the decimal base, not about the comparison of bases, which is the subject of the article Number base. Moreover, your formulation is not convenient for an encyclopedia; for a convenient tone, see the dozenal entry in the table in . D.Lazard (talk) 13:58, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your point, and thanks for informing me. Disregard the edit suggestion. 104.35.147.45 (talk) 22:42, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consider adding to Intro

message: I suggest to add a subsection on conversion to numbers with different bases AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 15:17, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add subsection on conversion 

message: Sorry, I overlooked your "fv" edit summary here. If you've checked the Atharva Veda and it doesn't support the claim, tagging the reference with  would be appropriate, but IMHO deleting the paragraph is too radical. Peter Brown (talk) 22:39, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. Yes, I did check it. It's a primary source, actually, of a hymn. I did search google books/scholar for "Atharvaveda" + decimal fractions (with and without a space in "Atharva Veda") and it turned up nothing beyond a couple of references to place value (related to the text having words for the numbers 10^4, 10^8, and so on). A google search of the specific citation turns up Hindu twitter accounts and websites, and nothing scholarly. This exact citation was, I believe, copied directly from "Hindupedia", although that page does not really assert what this sentence asserts. Certainly none of it appears to support the statement that the text makes use of "mathematical decimal fractions", which also conflicts with the information in this article, which puts the first use of decimal fractions around a thousand years after that. But I do not feel strongly enough about it to undo your reversion. Dragoon17 (talk) 04:46, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decimals in the Vedas 

message: "base 10" might as well be binary, seximal, octal, dozenal or almost any other base
perhaps there should be a , something like "Base 10" redirects here. For other uses, see List of numeral systems#Standard positional numeral systems.? Pandaqwanda (talk) 09:58, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Base 10 redirects to Decimal; base 8 redirects to Octal; base 6 redirects to Senary; base 12 redirects to Duodecimal; base 16 redirects to Hexadecimal. Template  is useful only for ambiguous redirects. This is not the case here. D.Lazard (talk) 10:19, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: i started the topic because, in the context of numeral systems, there isn't really such a thing as "base 10". in  bases, "10" is how you write the base itself: it can be two and hence base  can be binary, it can be five and hence base  can be quinary, etc also, the page in question seemingly doesn't refer to decimal as "base 10" anywherePandaqwanda (talk) 13:11, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: In English, when 10 is written without other specification, this means the number ten, not the numeral representing another number in another base. It is true that 10 is a numeral that represents a base in the base itself. It seems that you confuse "numeral 10" with "base 10". D.Lazard (talk) 14:07, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: i see, nevermind then. consensus: keep the redirect. Pandaqwanda (talk) 14:58, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  redirect from "base 10"