Talk:Centimetre

message: I can't help but notice that the article is "centimetre" but the table on the right uses "centimeter" and "meter". I realise that the first line states that "er" is US, but isn't the standard for the content to conform to the localisation of the title? - Wite_Noiz
:agree this is the US english version. It should be changed to centimeter. This article needs a lot of cleanup too. 152.3.84.131 20:26, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not the US English version. This is the English version. I think normal procedure is to respect the creator of the article's spelling. 80.202.227.170 12:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Localisation inconsistency 

message: Comment on length of inch, briefly here, withdrawn.  Evidently the inch's definition was changed by international convention from the former Imperial inch to exactly 2.54 cm while my back was turned in 1959.  However, there are some references to a slightly larger inch still used by the US Coast and Geodetic Survey (in use since 1866).  Perhaps the inch mentioned on the Centimetre main page should have the qualifier "International" attached to it?
--Spock2 07:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The International Inch? 

message: Can anybody provide a reference to chim being an abbreviation for centimetre? I've never heard of it.
The "uses of centimetre" section is a bit silly, it is used everywhere you want to measure a length, area or volume. Capacitance is measured in Farads, not cm; and virtually all maps I have ever seen use cm, not just Canada, with the possible exception of US maps. There is no corresponding "Uses of" section in the inch or Metre articles.TiffaF 10:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chim? 

message: FYI
I believe there are errors on this page which I am unable to correct
The centimeter is listed 10 x10-3 meter(engineering) and the then 1E-2 meter(scientific).  The correct amount should be 10 x 10-2 meter and 1E-2 meter.  From page below
"centimetre can be written as 10×10 − 3 m (engineering notation) or 1 E-2 m (scientific E notation) — meaning 10 × 1 mm or 1 m / 100 respectively."
If you click on the engineering link you'll seen the proper 10x10-2 m notation.  Therefore the number in the upper right box is also wrong at 10x10-3 m as this is a millimeter.  Perhaps someone who reads this know how to edit this items  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deww (talk • contribs) 20:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Errors on page 

message: 38.7cm  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.89.61 (talk) 01:43, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  cm change in degree 

message: there is a png of a centimetre that claims it is precisely 1 cm (as long as the width isn't changed)
this should be removed because a unit of length can't be accurately displayed on a screen. on my imac display it appears to be 9mm. the dpi, dot pitch and other factors all affect the accuracy of this image.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.179.252.140 (talk) 18:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  picture of 1 cm 

message: --216.81.178.90 (talk) 12:57, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a tad taller than someone that is 5' 10.866 141 732", apparently... 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 01:11, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: While of course people can't be measured by the millimeter, it may make sense to do so by the half-centimeter, or perhaps even the quarter-centimeter.--2001:A61:2082:4701:44D9:D757:E5F9:9826 (talk) 16:30, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope. Traditional measurements or people in ancient units limits it to feet and inches (ie a resolution of about 2 cm). Modern measurements of people in most countries (ie typically by doctors and listed on ID forms) is to the cm. Never fractions of inches or fractions of cm. Doctors know that people's posture changes the measurement by more than 1 cm, so it's no use trying to be more accurate.  Stepho  talk  20:00, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  how tall in feet is someone that is 180.34 cm