Jump to content

Talk:Billion: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 49: Line 49:
::::The 4th is indeed the first edition of that dictionary where the word appears. It was first published in 1694. The 9th edition is not finished.<ref>https://www.dictionnaire-academie.fr/</ref> [[User:Trigenibinion|Trigenibinion]] ([[User talk:Trigenibinion|talk]]) 05:43, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
::::The 4th is indeed the first edition of that dictionary where the word appears. It was first published in 1694. The 9th edition is not finished.<ref>https://www.dictionnaire-academie.fr/</ref> [[User:Trigenibinion|Trigenibinion]] ([[User talk:Trigenibinion|talk]]) 05:43, 17 December 2020 (UTC)


* I am looking at these sources and it appears to me that a "billion" was defined as 1,000 million by the ''Dictionary of the French language'' at the time. Do we really need to clarify it beyond that? We can just write that first sentence as ''American English adopted the short scale definition from the French in the 18th century (when a "billion" was defined as a thousand million by the Dictionary of the French language).'' Ultimately we are not really interested in usage, but rather the origin of two separate definitions. [[User:Betty Logan|Betty Logan]] ([[User talk:Betty Logan|talk]]) 22:36, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
* I am looking at these sources and it appears to me that a "billion" was defined as 1,000 million by the ''Dictionary of the French language'' at the time. Do we really need to clarify it beyond that? We can just write that first sentence as ''American English adopted the short scale definition from the French in the 19th century (when a "billion" was defined as a thousand million by the Dictionary of the French language).'' Ultimately we are not really interested in usage, but rather the origin of two separate definitions. [[User:Betty Logan|Betty Logan]] ([[User talk:Betty Logan|talk]]) 22:36, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:39, 17 December 2020

WikiProject iconNumbers Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Numbers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Numbers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

untitled

What is the point of this? Is this going to be turned into a proper article? In any case, if this page is to exist, then it must surely be the primary topic for billion, and be renamed Billion, with the disambiguation page being renamed Billion (disambiguation). W. P. Uzer (talk) 06:52, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Billion which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:59, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

cfr.: now, not Talk:Billion but Talk:Billion (disambiguation) (that talk section). --PLA y Grande Covián (talk) 17:37, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've quoted this, from Talk:Billion (disambiguation) to here. It was moved

– Topic of the article Billion (number) is primary. At least, it is almost certainly what a reader is looking for if typing "billion".

If it's primary topic, I don't understand an article with no interwiki links. I think the explanation is with the great/big diff. with:

I have to leave, now. Ciao! --PLA y Grande Covián (talk) 17:37, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction in American English

The article says "American English adopted the short scale definition from the French" but in French we use the long scale, "billion" means 10¹² and we use the word milliard for 10⁹. Is this saying that billion comes from the French milliard, or is it saying that the french historically used the short scale billion and later changed? Joancharmant (talk) 08:40, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

France originally used the long scale and then switched to the short scale. During this time the Americans adopted the French definition. The French later reverted to the long scale after World War 2. A full explanation is given in the "History" section. Betty Logan (talk) 11:33, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
French wikipedia states that it was in partial use in France when the Americans adopted it, that it was not generalized yet. Trigenibinion (talk) 22:47, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive edits by Trigenibinion

There has been a sequence of edits by Trigenibinion, repeatedly tagging because he is not able to access the source, paraphrasing a source he claims he cannot read], and using foreign-language Wikipedias as a source (which violates WP:CIRCULAR).

I don't quite know what the issue is here, whether he is directly challenging the claim, if this is a language barrier issue or whether he is just being a disruptive presence. However, the edits are disruptive and making the article unstable. I strongly suggest that Trigenibinion comes to the talk page and attempt to articulate the problem. If he is directly challenging the source then he must produce an alternative reliable source to challenge the existing claim with. Betty Logan (talk) 22:49, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is not me who has been disruptive
1. I requested clarification
2. The request was removed, and I noted the reference was behind paywall
3. The request was clarified
4. I improved the clarification according to French wikipedia
5. The improvement was removed because apparently it did not match the paywalled source
6. I added French wikipedia as a source for the improvement
7. The improvement was removed because French wikipedia was not considered authoritative
8. I come to discuss the issue to the talk page
9. I am accused of acting in bad faith Trigenibinion (talk) 22:56, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The problem here is that I do not know what you mean by "clarification"? Here is everything the OED say:

Etymology: < French billion, purposely formed in 16th cent. to denote the second power of a million adj. and n. (by substituting bi- comb. form for the initial letters), trillion and quadrillion being similarly formed to denote its 3rd and 4th powers. The name appears not to have been adopted in English before the end of the 17th cent.: see quot. from Locke. Subsequently the application of the word was changed by French arithmeticians, figures being divided in numeration into groups of threes, instead of sixes, so that French billion, trillion, denoted not the second and third powers of a million, but a thousand millions and a thousand thousand millions. In the 19th century, the U.S. adopted the French convention, but Britain retained the original and etymological use (to which France reverted in 1948). Since 1951 the U.S. value, a thousand millions, has been increasingly used in Britain, especially in technical writing and, more recently, in journalism; but the older sense ‘a million millions’ is still common.

However there is nothing really in there that is not already in the article. That is all there is but I honestly don't see what needs to be clarified. Betty Logan (talk) 23:22, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The French page claims that it was a minority using the short scale in France at the time it was imported to America (reformists). According to one of the references in the French page (authoritative), the definition was already in the official dictionary. The page then states that much later, when it was being taught in US schools, it was still in partial use in France and did not become generalized until later. That's why "the French used it" (at that the time of introduction to America) is misleading. Trigenibinion (talk) 23:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, now I appreciate what the issue is. However I am not conversant in French so I cannot consult the sources in the French article. Are you able to write up the history of the French usage here and copy the sources over? The sources have to be physically placed in this article for it to be verifiable. Betty Logan (talk) 02:37, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I will see if there are some accessible online sources about actual usage. There are some timeline differences between the English and French pages. But one can certainly say here is that by 1762 the short scale was the official definition in France.[1] Trigenibinion (talk) 03:09, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The 4th is indeed the first edition of that dictionary where the word appears. It was first published in 1694. The 9th edition is not finished.[2] Trigenibinion (talk) 05:43, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am looking at these sources and it appears to me that a "billion" was defined as 1,000 million by the Dictionary of the French language at the time. Do we really need to clarify it beyond that? We can just write that first sentence as American English adopted the short scale definition from the French in the 19th century (when a "billion" was defined as a thousand million by the Dictionary of the French language). Ultimately we are not really interested in usage, but rather the origin of two separate definitions. Betty Logan (talk) 22:36, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Dictionnaire de l’Académie française, 4e, 5e, 6e et 8e éditions (1762, 1798, 1835, 1932-35) ; Émile Littré, Dictionnaire de la langue française (1972-77) : billion, milliard.
  2. ^ https://www.dictionnaire-academie.fr/