Talk:Roman numerals
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Roman numerals article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 180 days ![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Spelling error
[edit]I'm new so I can't edit but there is a spelling error where the page says 'the Spanish siglo XVIII (not XVIII siglo) mean "18 century"' instead of the Spanish siglo XVIII (not XVIII siglo) meaning "18 century".
If someone could edit this that would be great Taftaloka (talk) 08:33, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
- "Mean" is correct (to take a simpler construction "for example, A means B") but yes, a construction with "meaning" would be correct too ("for example, A, meaning B" or "for example, A (meaning B)"). I've switched to "for". NebY (talk) 10:15, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. Although it doesn't really matter, I was also wondering about why the article does not use the Unicode Roman Numerals and instead opts for keyboard characters. (for exampleⅩⅧ instead of Latin characters XVIII) Taftaloka (talk) 01:33, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
Supposed crossword puzzle use
[edit]- The notation ID for 499 or IM for 999 is used in crossword puzzles.
I removed this bit, because (a) it is not clear what it means. Clues give words, not numbers, so on the face of it, this is backwards; (b) crossword setters play games with language, so unless extremely clear and significant these games do not belong here. Imaginatorium (talk) 05:42, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'm guessing some crossword puzzle had the clue "499" and the answer was "ID", and same for IM. However I think there has to be a link to the crossword puzzle as a reference for this information to stay. It is mildly interesting in that, along with the Excel thing, shows how common the "anything subtracts" idea is in modern times. Spitzak (talk) 15:24, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Sequences
[edit]Opening a question regarding linking Roman Numerals with sequences, and the Wikipedia article Sequences. NoelveNoelve (talk) 11:36, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- What, or where, is your question? Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:12, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Edit request for roman numerals
[edit]![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please see MCM and read right to left
MCM
M1100
100 or -100
Please indicate such ambiguities SOMEwherein the page
References
- ^ no sources
Thank you for listening!
[edit]Not done for now: You'll still need reliable sources to back up that claim. I'm sure you can find one somewhere. ⸺(Random)staplers 17:13, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Edit request § Other additive forms
[edit]![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
... and there are instances such as IIIIII and XXXXXX rather than VI or LX.
→ change to →
... and there are also instances of IIIIII and XXXXXX substituting for VI or LX.
24.19.113.134 (talk) 22:52, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Not done That would be misleading. The Romans used both forms; we should not indicate that either IIIIII and XXXXXX or VI and LX were mere substitutes, and these are examples rather than the only such instances. NebY (talk) 23:08, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ok thanks @NebY, but that's because I misunderstood (from the existing text) that the appearance on "tombstones" was exclusively a post-Roman usage, especially considering the context of the previous paragraph. If it is instead as you say, that it is a genuine Roman usage, then perhaps the section could clarify this somehow, for example by swapping the ordering of the last two paragraphs of Roman numerals § Other additive forms 24.19.113.134 (talk) 23:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- You're right - we had two paragraphs about ancient uses, two paras about modern ones, and then jumped back in time with that last one. I've moved it to follow the first two. Thanks. NebY (talk) 17:27, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- C-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in Mathematics
- C-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Mathematics
- C-Class vital articles in Mathematics
- C-Class Classical Greece and Rome articles
- Mid-importance Classical Greece and Rome articles
- All WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome pages
- C-Class Rome articles
- Mid-importance Rome articles
- All WikiProject Rome pages
- C-Class mathematics articles
- High-priority mathematics articles
- C-Class Writing system articles
- Low-importance Writing system articles
- Wikipedia pages referenced by the press