Talk:Trillion (disambiguation)

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 August 2006. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

2004 comments

Please see my discussion of Names for Large Numbers. -- Stephen001 (talk · contribs)
—Preceding comment was added at 03:43, 17 April 2003

see also: http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/large.html
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.20.137.118 (talk) 20:19, 31 March 2004

I changed the now undefined "European" to "non-English"[1], but please see Talk:Billion. -Wikibob | Talk 11:41, 2004 Jul 21 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy on naming large numbers: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Numbers in words --Ian Cairns 16:22, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Merging this article with Names of large numbers

Do you support or oppose merging this with Names of large numbers?

Support

Oppose

Oppose. Most links to Trillion 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 10^12 redirecting to Names of large numbers when it isn't a name at all. Voortle 15:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This helps define the meaning(s) of trillion very clearly and obviously. Names of large numbers, by definition, lists loads of names, most obscure and unused, and of minor, if any, interest to a person looking for a definition of trillion. This page also links in with the long and short scales page. Further, trillion is also a VERY common word, and is notable enough to need its own page. The Yeti 02:23, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Undecided

I reverted this article to the last version by Arthur and Voortle, before the latest sockpuppet of User:Science3456 started to mess with it. Arguments for redirect would be that the current article doesn't give much information, none of which could be mentioned in Names of large numbers either and the fact that larger numbers (e.g. septillion) redirect there as well. An argument against would be that is currently gives two alternative meanings/usages of the word trillion. —Ruud 22:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing, this should be focused on the english word

Articles should not have a single US perspective. But I think the english meaning of the words should be used for the definition. It would thus make more sense to write "a trillon usually means 10^12 but in older texts...". Later the text could elaborate on the sometimes false friends of the word billion in other languages --gnirre (talk) 16:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trillion is not an article but a disambiguation page. The purpose of such pages is to quickly find the right article or meaning for a term and not to elaborate. Both numbers are called trillion by some English speaking people. However, the number 10¹⁸ is so large that it's rarely named even by people who would call it trillion if they had to name it. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

billion, trillion

Difference trillion and billion —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.45.137.2 (talk) 01:30, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether you are suggesting something for the page Trillion or asking about what the difference is. If it's the latter then see Long and short scales or compare Billion and Trillion. Your IP address is Australian so you may be interested in Long and short scales#Australian usage. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In British engineering calculations, a billion is 1 million to the power 2 (1 million X 1 million). A trillion is 1 million to the power 3 (1 million X 1 million X 1 million). A 'dozen' is twelve (12), although a 'baker's dozen' is fifteen (15). A couple is generally taken to mean two (2) and a few are whatever number you can think of, give or take a couple. In Britain we speak English. We learned it from the Americans. Probably. 92.239.90.145 (talk) 18:55, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In Britain we speak British English and try to avoid the invasion of Americanisms (or at least some of us do). I agree with your billion and trillion in long scale because that is what I was taught at school. Harold Wilson chose the American billion for his devaluation of the British currency! I think you meant 13 for the baker's dozen. Dbfirs 19:00, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Devaluation of Pound: 1967 - Redefinition of Billion: 1974 Ian Cairns (talk) 19:24, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, yes, they happened in separate terms of office, didn't they? I conflated the two events in my (faulty) memory. I blame him for both! Dbfirs 07:31, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trillions

I've added a mention for the SF novel Trillions by Nicholas_Fisk, which is what I was looking for info on when I came to this page. Someone will have to make a proper article for it.109.155.117.204 (talk) 00:24, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For the Convenience of Users

Giving a few examples of long-scale and short-scale countries could save at least some of us an unnecessary click or two. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.125.7 (talk) 22:55, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For the Convenience of Users (II)

Maybe it would be worth noting which one is used (should be used) by en.wikipedia.org. (for example GDP of EU is "16.518 trillion (nominal, 2016)", I'm 90% sure that it's $16.518*10^{12}$ , but would be nice to have a convenient reassurance also)

193.109.235.158 (talk) 05:27, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Trillian (disambiguation )" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Trillian (disambiguation ). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]