1669:@Chaosdruid Simply saying that mixed script is not allowed isn't an argument. The reason that there is a ban on mixed script is because of move vandalism, not legitimate uses like this one. That said, I would agree that mixed script should probably be avoided for stylistic reasons in many cases. For instance, if one part of a title were written in Arabic and the other in Latin characters, such a juxtaposition would just look strange. But in this case, we're talking about the easily-recognizable mathematical symbol π. If anything, spelling it out looks stranger than using the standard symbol. Regarding your second point, the only part of the MoS section you linked to that seems to be relevant here is the part that suggests having redirects in place if a symbol appears in an article title that is not commonly found on keyboards. Well, a move will leave a redirect in place. The only other point that could conceivably be relevant is the worry that a browser will render an ordinary Greek letter as a square box. I don't think this would ever happen.
938:. Simply saying that mixed script is not allowed isn't an argument. The reason that there is a ban on mixed script is because of move vandalism, not legitimate uses like this one. That said, I would agree that mixed script should probably be avoided for stylistic reasons in many cases. For instance, if one part of a title were written in Arabic and the other in Latin characters, such a juxtaposition would just look strange. But in this case, we're talking about the easily-recognizable mathematical symbol π. If anything, spelling it out looks stranger than using the standard symbol. Regarding your second point, the only part of the MoS section you linked to that seems to be relevant here is the part that suggests having redirects in place if a symbol appears in an article title that is not commonly found on keyboards. Well, a move will leave a redirect in place. The only other point that could conceivably be relevant is the worry that a browser will render an ordinary Greek letter as a square box. I don't think this would ever happen.
200:
95:
1006:. Many of the Google books hits for "pi" are for a proper name, and sometimes the Greek letter π is written as , with square brackets. Also, many of those hits are not about the mathematical constant, but are publications of fraternities, etc., so not really relevant to this discussion. It's hard to say what the relative proportion of relevant uses is in each case, so we shouldn't place much stock in such search results. More on the issues with using naive Google searches in this way can be found in
85:
64:
305:
190:
169:
295:
274:
1887:) 08:34, 18 January 2016 (UTC) well I guess if you are quoting an RS, which I can't check at present, there isn't much I could do about this. In this case I suspect the RS may be biased, or not cited accurately. I have certainly got better results on a 96-gon on a spreadsheet using Archimedes than Archimedes did and my instinct (if such is acceptable) is that both methods are exactly the same in accuracy.
1465:, not because of a consensus that it has the right name. The situation is also different because that article needs disambiguation from the letter, and none of the other articles involving the constant do. "mixed script which is not allowed" is nonsense. There is no policy or guideline against mixed script titles, and in fact they can be created with no problem (I created
33:
1492:
Your arguments are illogical, not having consensus means there was no consensus - you cannot say that because there was a lack of consensus that is different to no consensus and so there was a consensus, dear oh dear...there is also the fact that symbols are discouraged in title names and that screen
1566:
can be used in a wide sense that includes Latin letters and standard punctuation marks (which is clearly not meant), in a narrow sense that excludes punctuations marks and everything that looks like a letter in some script, and in various senses in between. To see what is meant here one needs to use
1378:
You boldly renamed this article without previous discussion. Apparently you thought there would be a consensus for that move, but quite clearly there isn't. It's standard practice to undo such moves before any formal discussion. (Exceptions would be in case of serious policy violations or maybe when
1514:
My second sentence: We have an article about the letter π and an article about the constant π. This complicates matters, as articles on Greek letters are by convention under their names written in Latin letters. (For practical reasons: Some of them are visually indistinguishable from Latin letters,
1510:
The blacklist changes all the time in response to the activities of the pagemove vandals. This is decided more or less privately and discreetly between a small number of admins who try to minimise the unwanted side effects (such as server load, or moves to legitimate mathematical titles involving π
1422:
blacklist, so there isn't much of a problem. Once an article exists, there is a natural locus for discussing any new name and asking for admin help. It's just a minor inconvenience – so long as there is no misguided editor going around and making all such titles artificially contentious. As you may
1878:
The section on significance of the algorithm suggests that it generates better results than
Archimedes algorithm. Has anyone checked to see if Liu Hui's superior results are because he made more accurate calculations? The denominators in Archimedes fractions are mostly single digits and generally
1646:
But that article is about the symbol itself, while this article is not about the symbol "π", it is about the number that is symbolized by π (or about an algorithm for this number). When we are referring to the number, it's reasonable to use the symbol, which is a perfectly normal part of
English
1708:
That section says "Symbols such as "♥", as sometimes found in advertisements or logos, should never be used in titles. This includes non-Latin punctuation such as the characters in
Unicode's CJK Symbols and Punctuation block.". It is not referring to Greek letters, which have been being used in
1113:
Prefer the current title, I do not find the argument to change compelling. The use of the symbol π is just as reasonable as the use of latin letters with diacritics, and is probably more recognizable than some of the more rare diacritics such as Ł, which we also allow in article titles. — Carl
1567:
common sense, look at any examples specified, and read the rule in context. The only example given is ♥, which is a symbol even under the strictest reading of "symbol". That a strict reading is intended is also clear from the following rule, which would otherwise be redundant. The article on
1515:
and we should treat them all uniformly.) The situation is much clearer for titles such as "Liu Hui's π algorithm". No typesetter in their right mind would typeset this as "Liu Hui's pi algorithm" without very good reason, as it looks eccentric to the audience of the article.
1489:@Hans - Well, so nice to meet you! Maybe you can try a little harder to explain your second sentence? Do not call something nonsense just because you don't like it, get the policy changed, then it won't be on a blacklist and then the impediment will have been removed.
1216:
Well, I think it's safe to say that google ngrams is not a reliable indicator of what we should do. We should look at reliable, scholarly sources, rather than quantitative statistics from Google, that mindlessly indexes every random bit of junk in the cosmos.
1166:
Some have argued to avoid using diacritics when there is an alternative supported in standard
English (e.g., Moebius for Möbius). As a general rule, I support the use of diacritic marks in titles: "Moebius" seems like a philistine spelling to me. Added:
1493:
readers will only read it as "p". Lastly having a consensus of five people in a project does not mean that you can start doing things your way across the whole of the encyclopedia. These comments should be in the discussion section - moving them now...
1752:" all denote the number four. But that's not what the MOS means by "symbol"; it's referring to dingbats, graphical characters, etc. If it meant "use ASCII" that is what it would say. Each character in ASCII is also a symbol, of course. — Carl
1511:
requiring admin intervention) and balance them with the disruption caused by the vandals. It is dastardly to present the blacklist as an argument against perfectly legitimate titles, and in fact it borders on siding with the page move vandals.
1171:
basically says that the use of diacritics depends on what is used in most
English-language sources, so we prefer Möbius to Moebius, but Weierstrass to Weierstraß. The key point, however, is that there is nothing wrong with diacritic marks
615:
393:
Archimedes made arguments that hold with a formal modern definition. Liu Hui may have understood the *property* of convergence, but
Archimedes actually made limit arguments and *solved* convergences. Those are two very different things.
1289:
You moved the articles after the vote opened and now you vote on the move that you already made. I'm sure what you are doing is regular and proper. I just want to clarify things so that everyone can follow this unusually complex vote.
1395:
But why were the moves done in such an unusual way? After all, they were never likely to be voted down. But even if editors voted for these titles, they would still have trouble getting approved because they are blacklisted.
1623:
Not to disagree with your general point here, but you might choose a better example. It is a standard practice to spell out the names of symbols and this is not related to browser capabilities. The article title is
336:
1507:
OK, this is my last attempt. If you don't listen now I won't try again (I hope). There is no policy or guideline against mixed titles. If you think otherwise, the onus is on you to say where it is.
1149:
We have been using diacritics for years, in both article bodies and titles, and there seems to be little chance of that changing. Saying diacritics are "controversial" overstates the issue. — Carl
1895:) 09:21, 18 January 2016 (UTC) I turned to the talk page to see if anyone had raised this question. I too suspect that the difference in results is simply down to differences in calculation.
1042:
1015:
982:
647:
151:
1945:
1201:
1014:
is an actual algorithm (usually abbreviated "PI algorithm"), unrelated to the mathematical constant π, whereas there is no single "π algorithm". Finally, it's unclear what bearing if any
692:
401:
532:
1960:
371:
361:
1777:
code block, which does not include Greek letters. The question of Greek letters seems to be pretty far from what the people discussing that change to the MoS had in mind.
1965:
1879:
powers of 2. This made for speedier calculation but less accuracy. Nobody should claim that Liu Hui's method is superior unless this possibility has been investigated.
1609:
1585:
667:
Interesting. A quick check with
Windows calculator agrees with your value (to about 28 decimal places, anyway). Maybe the value given in the article is incorrect.
1940:
588:
246:
829:– These moves were part of an undiscussed program to remove the symbol π from the titles of articles involving the mathematical constant. Based on a discussion
1049:" on Google Books with your own qualifiers. (I've tried "approximations" and "irrational".) Spelled-out pi is typically ahead of the pi symbol by at least 10X.
331:
1694:
says not to use symbols in article titles? Also, you put comments here when they should be in the discussion section? (moved discussion to discussion section)
1449:
There is no reason to do it that way. There is a consensus at WikiProject
Mathematics that using "pi" in an article title is eccentric and should not be done.
1955:
1423:
have noticed, you haven't had much, if any, support yet but a lot of opposition. At some point it might be a good idea to just accept reality and disengage.
1091:. The title with the symbol is clearly preferable - using "pi" looks odd. Chaosdruid may be right that some rule says such-and-such, but that's why we have
1379:
just nobody feels strongly about the matter. Neither applies here.) That the move proposal was formulated the other way round is not really a problem. See
1248:. "Pi" is an approximation of the proper symbol to denote the number we're discussing. We should use π when that doesn't lead to confusion or ambiguity.
1045:
has a long list of article titles with spelled-out Greek letters, but very few titles with actual Greek script. You can compare the results for "pi" and "
1930:
141:
1304:
I wasn't aware of this discussion. In the future, if you'd like to have me participate on a !vote, feel free to leave a message on my User Talk page.
327:
318:
279:
1935:
1466:
1415:
969:," even though typing in a naked pi symbol like this brings up mostly equations and Greek text. On Google books, there are 40 times more hits for
1410:
There is no conspiracy against you, just lots of editors acting independently without any coordination. Titles containing π are affected by the
560:
2) In his writing about pi calculation, Liu Hui did not draw any diagrams, all the colorful diagrams included heare are my "origina research".
256:
117:
1925:
970:
974:
736:
1950:
1888:
1880:
1730:
to represent the number 3.xxxxxxxx. The Greek letter Pi does not mean 3.XXXXX it is a letter, not a number. I have raise the matter at
1902:
1316:
1275:
874:
1200:
for that matter). Sadly, the even more philistine "Mobius strip" gets far more hits than "Möbius strip" and "Moebius strip" combined.
732:
108:
69:
854:
806:
carried out the requested moves on April 27 & 28. Despite having been premature, the discussion below supports the action. --
563:
3) Ha, Liu Hui did not expressed his algorithm in modern algebraic form, all those algebra formulars are my "orginal research" --
696:
405:
222:
863:
850:
740:
1829:
462:
Cancel that, I didn't read the whole way through; however, this article still needs more references and in-line citations. --
1784:
1676:
1224:
1187:
1029:
945:
840:
962:
1773:, the (relatively recent) change of the MoS to exclude symbols appears to have been primarily targeted at elements of the
1770:
1731:
966:
859:
534:-gon and alike and that "check with spreadsheet" stuff are certainly original research. Will figure out how to fix them. —
1435:
Use it on the redirect, if you can prove there will be many people using that in the search, but not the actual article.
44:
1849:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
794:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
326:
content on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
323:
213:
174:
1095:- so that rules don't force us to do silly things. And I can't believe Kauffner is seriously using Google hits for a
759:
626:
554:
1) Liu Hui never wrote a word in
English, therefore this article certainly belongs to "original research" category.
221:
related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1135:
Diacritics don't usually obscure the underlying Latin character, yet they are highly controversial all the same.
826:
310:
1778:
1670:
1363:
allowed to vote? Or perhaps we can still vote and the articles can be moved again at the end the voting period?
1218:
1181:
1023:
939:
878:
834:
1687:
1545:
1010:. In regards to your second search, the reason "Pi algorithm" gets more hits than "π algorithm" is because the
913:
833:, consensus is clearly against these moves. So I would like to request that the original titles be restored.
1892:
1884:
911:
The symbol is not used on the main Pi article and is mixed script which is not allowed. (added) See MoS for "
884:
822:
1906:
657:
426:
1312:
1271:
1864:
which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —
1540:
When I say "symbols are discouraged in title names" I am referring to the article titles MoS which says "
748:
420:
I would be great if someone would add references to all of the information found. It seems odd that both
1748:
Strictly speaking the symbol "P" is a symbol that denotes the letter P, and the symbols "4", "IV", and "
1344:
1336:
50:
498:
94:
1340:
1898:
1817:
1811:
1739:
1699:
1647:
mathematical usage, and which is learned in grade school by the vast majority of our readers. — Carl
1615:
1612:
1552:
1519:
1516:
1498:
1481:
1478:
1453:
1450:
1440:
1427:
1424:
1387:
1384:
1177:
1168:
922:
900:
897:
720:
688:
397:
32:
1081:
672:
116:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1825:
1637:
1401:
1368:
1295:
1207:
1140:
1054:
990:
767:
715:
It is unconventional to use a math symbol in a title even when that symbol is common usage. It's
653:
482:
454:
100:
84:
63:
17:
981:, does not use the pi symbol. 3) The usual practice on Wiki is to spell out Greek letters. See
1360:
1307:
1266:
1104:
803:
568:
189:
168:
610:{\displaystyle \pi \approx 3.1415904632280500957384585059309517235542823086757970500\ldots ,}
716:
1910:
1868:
1788:
1774:
1764:
1743:
1735:
1721:
1703:
1695:
1680:
1659:
1641:
1618:
1556:
1548:
1522:
1502:
1494:
1484:
1456:
1444:
1436:
1430:
1405:
1390:
1372:
1348:
1321:
1299:
1280:
1257:
1228:
1211:
1191:
1161:
1144:
1126:
1108:
1083:
1058:
1033:
994:
949:
926:
918:
903:
888:
844:
815:
811:
771:
700:
676:
661:
572:
543:
484:
456:
409:
1594:
1570:
1196:
If the standard is which version gets the most ghits, you would never use diacritics (or
1380:
1253:
1073:
668:
434:
both used a 96-gon to find the area of a circle. Was it really his own calculation? --
294:
273:
1919:
1821:
1759:
1716:
1709:
titles for years. A Greek letter is no more a "symbol" than any other letter. — Carl
1654:
1633:
1588:
1397:
1364:
1291:
1203:
1156:
1136:
1121:
1092:
1050:
986:
763:
539:
463:
435:
1840:
1100:
785:
564:
205:
1865:
1625:
1473:
a technical measure against renaming existing pages to such title, which exists
113:
807:
421:
300:
195:
90:
1249:
1771:
Wikipedia_talk:Article_titles#Symbols_in_article_titles.2C_specifically_Pi
1755:
1712:
1650:
1152:
1117:
744:
652:
What is correct, or should I ask in this way - how computation was done?
535:
582:
For the 3072-gon I've got numerical value of approximation directly as:
1861:
1477:
to slow down a prolific vandal. So both of your arguments are invalid.
684:
https://en.wikipedia.org/Floating_point#Common_Values_of_Rounding_Error
431:
1749:
1469:, and then had it deleted as unnecessary, to verify this). There is
1461:@Chaosdruid The attempt to rename the main Pi article failed due to
727:, and so forth. In this case, "pi" is a far more common usage than "
1611:, not because it falls under the previous rule (which it doesn't).
755:
218:
1359:
Huh....So what happened to the seven-day voting period? Is only
683:
26:
896:. The current title is really eccentric, for no good reason.
1467:
User:Hans Adler/Testing the title blacklist as it concerns π
1043:
Greek letters used in mathematics, science, and engineering
1016:
Greek letters used in mathematics, science, and engineering
983:
Greek letters used in mathematics, science, and engineering
978:
330:, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
1629:
599:
3.1415904632280500957384585059309517235542823086757970500
1591:
because many browsers cannot display the special letter
1335:
the π version of the title per discussions above and at
784:
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
1808:
1007:
830:
1839:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
1597:
1573:
1265:
per extensive discussion at WikiProject Mathematics.
629:
591:
501:
1726:
That is not strictly true, the letter is being used
1686:
You didn't click the link I put in then to read the
1562:
You are misreading that passage. Obviously the term
217:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
112:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1603:
1579:
641:
609:
526:
1946:B-Class China-related articles of Low-importance
1072:Argumentum ad Googlum? With a non-ASCII symbol?
1018:has on this discussion. That includes the name
762:for journal articles with "pi" in their titles.
1414:blacklist (I just verified this by creating a
875:Talk:Proof_that_π_is_irrational#Requested_move
642:{\displaystyle \pi \approx 3.141590463236763.}
337:History of Science Collaboration of the Month
8:
1546:Knowledge:Article_titles#Special_characters
1961:Low-importance history of science articles
1896:
1860:There is a move discussion in progress on
1418:of that type with no problem), not by the
686:
395:
268:
163:
58:
1596:
1572:
754:. Math journals can go either way. Check
628:
590:
515:
500:
322:, an attempt to improve and organize the
346:Knowledge:WikiProject History of Science
1966:WikiProject History of Science articles
1628:, although every browser can render a "
349:Template:WikiProject History of Science
270:
165:
60:
30:
1941:Low-importance China-related articles
7:
873:. There is a relevant discussion at
799:The result of the move request was:
211:This article is within the scope of
106:This article is within the scope of
1956:B-Class history of science articles
977:. 2) The corresponding main title,
49:It is of interest to the following
1598:
1574:
527:{\displaystyle (6\times 2^{1000})}
25:
1931:Low-priority mathematics articles
1769:Just to reiterate what I said at
693:2620:0:1009:3:A057:29E1:13B5:BBE4
402:2620:0:1009:3:A057:29E1:13B5:BBE4
126:Knowledge:WikiProject Mathematics
303:
293:
272:
198:
188:
167:
129:Template:WikiProject Mathematics
93:
83:
62:
31:
18:Talk:Liu Hui's pi algorithm
851:Chronology of computation of pi
366:This article has been rated as
251:This article has been rated as
146:This article has been rated as
1936:B-Class China-related articles
855:Chronology of computation of π
620:but article says differently:
521:
502:
495:That impressive figure from a
334:. You can also help with the
319:History of Science WikiProject
1:
860:List of formulae involving pi
701:21:24, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
682:It's probably machine error:
677:13:11, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
662:22:13, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
410:21:27, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
225:and see a list of open tasks.
120:and see a list of open tasks.
1926:B-Class mathematics articles
864:List of formulae involving π
316:This article is part of the
1856:Move discussion in progress
735:gets vastly more hits than
352:history of science articles
231:Knowledge:WikiProject China
1982:
1951:WikiProject China articles
1642:13:28, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
1619:11:20, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
1557:10:59, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
1523:10:26, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
1503:09:36, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
1485:06:54, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
1457:06:55, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
1445:20:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
1431:06:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
1406:06:08, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
1391:10:31, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
1373:09:46, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
927:20:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
904:10:52, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
889:07:25, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
845:07:12, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
772:02:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
707:Explanation of move from "
573:14:14, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
544:04:30, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
372:project's importance scale
257:project's importance scale
234:Template:WikiProject China
1911:19:34, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
1874:Significance of Algorithm
1176:. It's just an issue of
1012:power inversion algorithm
365:
311:History of science portal
288:
250:
183:
145:
78:
57:
1869:13:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
1846:Please do not modify it.
1810:(Non-neutral notice) by
816:06:16, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
791:Please do not modify it.
719:, not "3 Blind Mice", a
485:17:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
457:17:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
152:project's priority scale
1789:18:05, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1765:17:25, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1744:17:19, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1722:17:11, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1704:16:57, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1681:14:02, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1660:11:52, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1349:02:49, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
1322:17:33, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1300:17:05, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1281:16:11, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1258:12:45, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1229:17:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
1212:15:41, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
1192:13:29, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
1162:13:03, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
1145:12:53, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
1127:11:50, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1109:09:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1084:08:33, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1059:12:53, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
1034:14:13, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
995:07:56, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
950:14:02, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
733:pi algorithm -wikipedia
427:Measurement of a Circle
109:WikiProject Mathematics
1605:
1581:
1022:of each Greek letter.
823:Liu Hui's pi algorithm
737:π algorithm -wikipedia
643:
611:
528:
237:China-related articles
39:This article is rated
1606:
1582:
917:" in article titles.
827:Liu Hui's π algorithm
644:
612:
529:
1604:{\displaystyle \wp }
1595:
1580:{\displaystyle \wp }
1571:
731:". On Google books,
721:Dirac delta function
627:
589:
499:
132:mathematics articles
1832:) 11:06, 9 May 2011
1688:MoS: Article titles
1542:Do not use symbols:
914:Do not use symbols:
1732:MoS:Article Titles
1601:
1577:
961:1) Googling puts "
639:
637:3.141590463236763.
607:
524:
343:History of Science
324:history of science
280:History of Science
101:Mathematics portal
45:content assessment
1913:
1901:comment added by
1834:
1820:comment added by
1763:
1720:
1658:
1463:lack of consensus
1361:User:CRGreathouse
1320:
1279:
1160:
1125:
703:
691:comment added by
491:Original research
412:
400:comment added by
386:
385:
382:
381:
378:
377:
267:
266:
263:
262:
214:WikiProject China
162:
161:
158:
157:
16:(Redirected from
1973:
1848:
1833:
1814:
1807:Note canvassing
1781:
1753:
1710:
1673:
1648:
1610:
1608:
1607:
1602:
1586:
1584:
1583:
1578:
1310:
1269:
1221:
1199:
1184:
1150:
1115:
1079:
1048:
1026:
965:" way ahead of "
942:
881:
837:
793:
730:
717:Three Blind Mice
710:
648:
646:
645:
640:
616:
614:
613:
608:
533:
531:
530:
525:
520:
519:
479:
477:
475:
473:
451:
449:
447:
445:
354:
353:
350:
347:
344:
313:
308:
307:
306:
297:
290:
289:
284:
276:
269:
239:
238:
235:
232:
229:
208:
203:
202:
201:
192:
185:
184:
179:
171:
164:
134:
133:
130:
127:
124:
103:
98:
97:
87:
80:
79:
74:
66:
59:
42:
36:
35:
27:
21:
1981:
1980:
1976:
1975:
1974:
1972:
1971:
1970:
1916:
1915:
1876:
1858:
1853:
1844:
1815:
1805:
1779:
1775:unicode symbols
1671:
1593:
1592:
1569:
1568:
1357:
1219:
1197:
1182:
1074:
1046:
1024:
940:
879:
835:
789:
779:
728:
713:
708:
625:
624:
587:
586:
580:
511:
497:
496:
493:
471:
469:
467:
465:
443:
441:
439:
437:
418:
391:
351:
348:
345:
342:
341:
309:
304:
302:
282:
236:
233:
230:
227:
226:
204:
199:
197:
177:
131:
128:
125:
122:
121:
99:
92:
72:
43:on Knowledge's
40:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
1979:
1977:
1969:
1968:
1963:
1958:
1953:
1948:
1943:
1938:
1933:
1928:
1918:
1917:
1875:
1872:
1857:
1854:
1852:
1851:
1841:requested move
1804:
1801:
1800:
1799:
1798:
1797:
1796:
1795:
1794:
1793:
1792:
1791:
1780:Sławomir Biały
1672:Sławomir Biały
1667:
1666:
1665:
1664:
1663:
1662:
1600:
1576:
1538:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1533:
1532:
1531:
1530:
1529:
1528:
1527:
1526:
1525:
1512:
1508:
1490:
1459:
1356:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1329:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1325:
1324:
1305:
1284:
1283:
1260:
1242:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1237:
1236:
1235:
1234:
1233:
1232:
1231:
1220:Sławomir Biały
1183:Sławomir Biały
1130:
1129:
1111:
1086:
1066:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1062:
1061:
1037:
1036:
1025:Sławomir Biały
1008:the WPM thread
998:
997:
971:"pi algorithm"
955:
954:
953:
952:
941:Sławomir Biały
930:
929:
906:
891:
880:Sławomir Biały
867:
866:
857:
836:Sławomir Biały
821:
819:
797:
796:
786:requested move
780:
778:
777:Requested move
775:
750:New York Times
712:
705:
680:
679:
650:
649:
638:
635:
632:
618:
617:
606:
603:
600:
597:
594:
579:
576:
558:
557:
556:
555:
548:
523:
518:
514:
510:
507:
504:
492:
489:
488:
487:
417:
414:
390:
387:
384:
383:
380:
379:
376:
375:
368:Low-importance
364:
358:
357:
355:
315:
314:
298:
286:
285:
283:Low‑importance
277:
265:
264:
261:
260:
253:Low-importance
249:
243:
242:
240:
223:the discussion
210:
209:
193:
181:
180:
178:Low‑importance
172:
160:
159:
156:
155:
144:
138:
137:
135:
118:the discussion
105:
104:
88:
76:
75:
67:
55:
54:
48:
37:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1978:
1967:
1964:
1962:
1959:
1957:
1954:
1952:
1949:
1947:
1944:
1942:
1939:
1937:
1934:
1932:
1929:
1927:
1924:
1923:
1921:
1914:
1912:
1908:
1904:
1900:
1894:
1890:
1889:128.68.254.48
1886:
1882:
1881:128.68.254.48
1873:
1871:
1870:
1867:
1863:
1855:
1850:
1847:
1842:
1837:
1836:
1835:
1831:
1827:
1823:
1819:
1813:
1809:
1802:
1790:
1786:
1782:
1776:
1772:
1768:
1767:
1766:
1761:
1757:
1751:
1747:
1746:
1745:
1741:
1737:
1734:for clarity.
1733:
1729:
1725:
1724:
1723:
1718:
1714:
1707:
1706:
1705:
1701:
1697:
1693:
1689:
1685:
1684:
1683:
1682:
1678:
1674:
1661:
1656:
1652:
1645:
1644:
1643:
1639:
1635:
1631:
1627:
1622:
1621:
1620:
1617:
1614:
1590:
1589:Weierstrass p
1565:
1561:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1554:
1550:
1547:
1543:
1524:
1521:
1518:
1513:
1509:
1506:
1505:
1504:
1500:
1496:
1491:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1483:
1480:
1476:
1472:
1468:
1464:
1460:
1458:
1455:
1452:
1448:
1447:
1446:
1442:
1438:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1429:
1426:
1421:
1417:
1413:
1409:
1408:
1407:
1403:
1399:
1394:
1393:
1392:
1389:
1386:
1382:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1374:
1370:
1366:
1362:
1354:
1350:
1346:
1342:
1338:
1334:
1331:
1330:
1323:
1318:
1314:
1309:
1306:
1303:
1302:
1301:
1297:
1293:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1285:
1282:
1277:
1273:
1268:
1264:
1261:
1259:
1255:
1251:
1247:
1244:
1243:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1209:
1205:
1202:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1189:
1185:
1179:
1178:WP:COMMONNAME
1175:
1170:
1169:WP:DIACRITICS
1165:
1164:
1163:
1158:
1154:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1128:
1123:
1119:
1112:
1110:
1106:
1102:
1098:
1094:
1090:
1087:
1085:
1082:
1080:
1077:
1071:
1068:
1067:
1060:
1056:
1052:
1044:
1041:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1021:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1002:
1001:
1000:
999:
996:
992:
988:
984:
980:
976:
975:"π algorithm"
972:
968:
964:
960:
957:
956:
951:
947:
943:
937:
934:
933:
932:
931:
928:
924:
920:
916:
915:
910:
907:
905:
902:
899:
895:
892:
890:
886:
882:
876:
872:
869:
868:
865:
861:
858:
856:
852:
849:
848:
847:
846:
842:
838:
832:
828:
824:
818:
817:
813:
809:
805:
802:
795:
792:
787:
782:
781:
776:
774:
773:
769:
765:
761:
757:
753:
751:
746:
745:BBC uses "pi"
742:
741:CNN uses "pi"
738:
734:
726:
722:
718:
706:
704:
702:
698:
694:
690:
685:
678:
674:
670:
666:
665:
664:
663:
659:
655:
636:
633:
630:
623:
622:
621:
604:
601:
598:
595:
592:
585:
584:
583:
577:
575:
574:
570:
566:
561:
553:
552:
551:
550:
549:
546:
545:
541:
537:
516:
512:
508:
505:
490:
486:
483:
481:
480:
461:
460:
459:
458:
455:
453:
452:
433:
429:
428:
423:
415:
413:
411:
407:
403:
399:
388:
373:
369:
363:
360:
359:
356:
339:
338:
333:
329:
325:
321:
320:
312:
301:
299:
296:
292:
291:
287:
281:
278:
275:
271:
258:
254:
248:
245:
244:
241:
224:
220:
216:
215:
207:
196:
194:
191:
187:
186:
182:
176:
173:
170:
166:
153:
149:
143:
140:
139:
136:
119:
115:
111:
110:
102:
96:
91:
89:
86:
82:
81:
77:
71:
68:
65:
61:
56:
52:
46:
38:
34:
29:
28:
19:
1903:86.145.83.33
1897:— Preceding
1877:
1859:
1845:
1838:
1816:— Preceding
1806:
1727:
1691:
1668:
1563:
1541:
1539:
1474:
1470:
1462:
1419:
1411:
1358:
1332:
1308:CRGreathouse
1267:CRGreathouse
1262:
1245:
1173:
1096:
1088:
1075:
1069:
1019:
1011:
1003:
958:
935:
912:
908:
893:
870:
820:
804:CRGreathouse
801:Pages moved.
800:
798:
790:
783:
749:
724:
714:
687:— Preceding
681:
651:
619:
581:
562:
559:
547:
494:
464:
436:
425:
419:
396:— Preceding
392:
367:
335:
328:project page
317:
252:
212:
206:China portal
148:Low-priority
147:
107:
73:Low‑priority
51:WikiProjects
1728:as a symbol
1626:Dollar sign
578:Calculation
416:References?
123:Mathematics
114:mathematics
70:Mathematics
1920:Categories
1803:Canvassing
1736:Chaosdruid
1696:Chaosdruid
1587:is called
1549:Chaosdruid
1495:Chaosdruid
1437:Chaosdruid
1355:Discussion
1020:and symbol
919:Chaosdruid
877:as well.
747:, and the
725:δ function
422:Archimedes
332:discussion
1690:where it
1416:test page
1337:WT:WPMATH
973:than for
752:uses "pi"
711:" to "pi"
669:Gandalf61
1899:unsigned
1830:contribs
1822:Kauffner
1818:unsigned
1634:Kauffner
1420:creation
1398:Kauffner
1365:Kauffner
1292:Kauffner
1204:Kauffner
1137:Kauffner
1078:anthoxyl
1070:Support.
1051:Kauffner
987:Kauffner
764:Kauffner
723:, not a
689:unsigned
398:unsigned
1862:Talk:Pi
1692:clearly
1381:WP:BURO
1333:Support
1263:Support
1246:Support
1101:Zundark
1089:Support
1004:Comment
936:Comment
894:Support
871:Comment
565:Gisling
432:Liu Hui
370:on the
255:on the
150:on the
41:B-class
1866:RM bot
1564:symbol
1174:per se
1097:symbol
1093:WP:IAR
959:Oppose
909:Oppose
743:, the
430:) and
389:Limits
47:scale.
1616:Adler
1520:Adler
1482:Adler
1454:Adler
1428:Adler
1388:Adler
901:Adler
808:Hadal
228:China
219:China
175:China
1907:talk
1893:talk
1885:talk
1826:talk
1812:Hans
1785:talk
1760:talk
1740:talk
1717:talk
1700:talk
1677:talk
1655:talk
1638:talk
1613:Hans
1553:talk
1517:Hans
1499:talk
1479:Hans
1475:only
1471:only
1451:Hans
1441:talk
1425:Hans
1412:move
1402:talk
1385:Hans
1369:talk
1345:talk
1296:talk
1254:talk
1250:Ozob
1225:talk
1208:talk
1188:talk
1157:talk
1141:talk
1122:talk
1105:talk
1099:. --
1055:talk
1030:talk
991:talk
946:talk
923:talk
898:Hans
885:talk
841:talk
831:here
812:talk
768:talk
760:here
758:and
756:here
697:talk
673:talk
658:talk
654:xJaM
569:talk
540:talk
517:1000
406:talk
1843:.
1756:CBM
1713:CBM
1651:CBM
1632:".
1341:Ben
1180:.
1153:CBM
1118:CBM
536:Kxx
362:Low
247:Low
142:Low
1922::
1909:)
1828:•
1787:)
1758:·
1742:)
1715:·
1702:)
1679:)
1653:·
1640:)
1630:$
1599:℘
1575:℘
1555:)
1501:)
1443:)
1404:)
1383:.
1371:)
1347:)
1339:.
1315:|
1298:)
1274:|
1256:)
1227:)
1210:)
1190:)
1155:·
1143:)
1120:·
1107:)
1057:)
1032:)
993:)
985:.
979:Pi
963:pi
948:)
925:)
887:)
862:→
853:→
843:)
825:→
814:)
788:.
770:)
739:.
699:)
675:)
660:)
634:≈
631:π
602:…
596:≈
593:π
571:)
542:)
509:×
472:ok
444:ok
408:)
1905:(
1891:(
1883:(
1824:(
1783:(
1762:)
1754:(
1750:四
1738:(
1719:)
1711:(
1698:(
1675:(
1657:)
1649:(
1636:(
1551:(
1544:"
1497:(
1439:(
1400:(
1367:(
1343:(
1319:)
1317:c
1313:t
1311:(
1294:(
1278:)
1276:c
1272:t
1270:(
1252:(
1223:(
1206:(
1198:π
1186:(
1159:)
1151:(
1139:(
1124:)
1116:(
1103:(
1076:X
1053:(
1047:π
1028:(
989:(
967:π
944:(
921:(
883:(
839:(
810:(
766:(
729:π
709:π
695:(
671:(
656:(
605:,
567:(
538:(
522:)
513:2
506:6
503:(
478:3
476:1
474:s
470:r
468:b
466:p
450:3
448:1
446:s
442:r
440:b
438:p
424:(
404:(
374:.
340:.
259:.
154:.
53::
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
